3344 réponses à ce sujet

[Sporothrix]

I personally found it refreshing.  Queer characters in a fantasy setting who are allowed to be queer without a world of drama and modern homophobia?  Sign me up.  Remember, while heteronormativity may have run strong in historical settings, the explicit acknowledgement of heterosexuality has a very short history (see: http://www.salon.com...e_heterosexual/ ).  To me, it's more realistic to have a setting where queer people are not often acknowledged, but are also not explicitly oppressed.  

 

I find that anti-label talk, presented in that type of articles, frankly naive and working against people with exclusive same sex attractions, meaning gay men and particularly lesbians, given homophobic stereotypes about lesbians that already question legitimacy of their sexuality. Straight people always existed  - their feelings were simply considered as the norm. It's simply untrue that before modern concept of sexuality became widely known, people were more free. Non-straight people were called then "sodomites" and "tribades", etc., which wasn't specifically about gay men and lesbians but about everyone who engaged in same-sex acts, which had to include bisexual people as well, and they were persecuted.

 

The word "tribade" was coined in Ancient Greece for a woman who engaged in sexual contacts with other women. It was thought that she must be some sort of "hermaphrodite", because it wasn't believed that a "normal" woman could do it on its own. It's ironic that ancient Greece is very often cited as an ideal by anti-labels folks.

 

 

The woman interviewed in that article has clear intention to deny that there is some real, non-socially constructed difference between straight and gay people, she even straight up denied legitimacy of lesbian sexuality in that answer to remark about trans men. What's ironic is the fact that homophobes embraced that rhetoric as well, and very often, it's hard to notice any difference between those two groups:

 

http://faithinfemini...on-sexuality-2/

[jtav]

I hope I don't stick my foot in my mouth with this...

 

I don't want the lesbian and gay characters romance history to dominate them. With Cortez, Robert dominated his arc to such a degree that it took me a long time to figure out what kind of Shep would go for him. I had a much easier time with Samantha.

[David Gaider]

Rather than respond directly, a couple of comments based on a few recent posts:

 

1) Making all (or most, it seems) romances bisexual:

 

That could be done. Of course, since doing so just added on all the extra cinematic work to add the extra genders into the various cinematic conversations (different genders are different heights, requiring extra camera work and a LOT of extra attention in any scene where the two characters interact), that would also mean cutting down on the number of total romances. It is NOT a matter of flipping a switch to add extra options because someone thought that would be more fair... not for genders, not for races. It also means less opportunities to tell new stories, and less variety. So if you're picturing a bonanza where all those romances would now be available to everyone... that was never on the table, and never could be.

 

Also, anyone arguing that straight characters shouldn't exist because "straight people have gotten enough in the past" is going to be summarily ignored. You can have whatever opinion you wish, but this game is not here to single-handedly make up for all of gaming's issues with representation, and suggesting it should be so is likely only to provide fuel for those who erroneously espouse that it is already so.

 

2) Vivienne, as a black woman, not being a LI:

 

I get that some people are disappointed. That's fair--she's pretty awesome, and could have made for an interesting romance if she had been concepted for one. Considering that one could also make an argument about a black woman being present in the game solely to be a fetishized sex object (as if no-one ever made this argument about Isabela?), or that this brings up awkward discussions about skin color vis à vis Josephine, I'm not sure this is a good road to go down. I would hope a character could make for great representation in the game, and do so by being a great character and not solely by whether or not they're available to be romanced, and that this will be evident once someone plays.

[SofaJockey]

I thought I'd share how that poll of >3,000 forumites that did the rounds a month ago turned out.

The survey was just for fun and this if how the 8 romances were favoured in respect of the question:

 

'Please choose one most preferred love interest for you'

 

At the close, the most preferred choices for LI among the 8 finally confirmed were: 

• Solas 18.7%
• Cullen 15.1%,
• Sera 13.8%,
• Cassandra 13.5%,
• Dorian 12.9%,
• Iron Bull 12.3%,
• Josephine 8.1% and
• Blackwall 5.6% .

At the point Varric was eliminated his vote was 9.5%.

At the point Vivienne was eliminated, her vote was 5.4%.

 

I think it's nice to see a good spread of interest in all the romances.

It's interesting to me that the two most preferred LI's are the two 'extra' race-gated options.

The high percentage interest in single-sex LI's Sera and Dorian suggests what has been

said before, which is that same-sex romances are not simply 'for LGBT people' but

are enjoyed by many straight people as well.

[Willowhugger]

I find that anti-label talk, presented in that type of articles, frankly naive and working against people with exclusive same sex attractions, meaning gay men and particularly lesbians, given homophobic stereotypes about lesbians that already question legitimity of their sexuality. Straight people always existed  - their feelings were simply considered as the norm. It's simply untrue that before modern concept of sexuality became widely known, people were more free. Non-straight people were called then "sodomites" and "tribades", etc., which wasn't specifically about gay men and lesbians but about everyone who engaged in same-sex acts, which had to include bisexual people as well, and they were persecuted.

 

I think it's something of a line because one doesn't want to diminish the struggles of gays for social acceptance or that their position is anything less than who they are, what they are, and something which is an important part of their identities which is never going to change or be diminished. On the other hand, homosexual fiction has a history of being represented by heterosexuals as uniformly tragic, doomed, or based on suffering. Joss Whedon, I mentioned, was resoudningly criticized for his depiction of Tara and Willow's relationship as ending with Tara's murder.

 

Not because they believed that he was homophobic but because it was playing into the stereotype that lesbians could not have relationships which didn't end up doomed in some way.

 

In short, there's a dearth of Happy Well Adjusted Lesbians and Gay MenTM in fiction.

[MCG]

I wasn't even going to romance Vivienne and still I'm disappointed she isn't a LI. She looks perfect, interesting and strong which would have been brilliant to witness (on YouTube, mind). She's likely going to be one of it not my most used characters after my Inquisitor.

[Hazegurl]

It's sad that people can't just be happy for others.

There's nothing wrong with being happy for others and disappointed at not getting what you want. It doesn't mean I want to burn the BW office down, rage on twitter like an idiot, or wish a terrible playthrough on those who got what they wanted. It just means that I am personally disappointed and expressed my opinion that Blackwall would have been better with a man. Mind you, I don't even know the character or played the game. I'm just going off a personal desire to see a burly gay Knight.  Relax.

[Milana]

It also means less opportunities to tell new stories, and less variety. So if you're picturing a bonanza where all those romances would now be available to everyone... that was never on the table, and never could be.

Well i didnt see any problem with DA2 story, because all LIs except for DLC one were available to the player... Though who am i to argue,i understand you do know better, still doesnt lessen my dissapoinment that i'll only have 1 playthrough,because only one of 2 available options i actually like

[TheJediSaint]

Spoiler

Rather than respond directly, a couple of comments based on a few recent posts:

 

1) Making all (or most, it seems) romances bisexual:

 

That could be done. Of course, since doing so just added on all the extra cinematic work to add the extra genders into the various cinematic conversations (different genders are different heights, requiring extra camera work and a LOT of extra attention in any scene where the two characters interact), that would also mean cutting down on the number of total romances. It is NOT a matter of flipping a switch to add extra options because someone thought that would be more fair... not for genders, not for races. It also means less opportunities to tell new stories, and less variety. So if you're picturing a bonanza where all those romances would now be available to everyone... that was never on the table, and never could be.

 

Also, anyone arguing that straight characters shouldn't exist because "straight people have gotten enough in the past" is going to be summarily ignored. You can have whatever opinion you wish, but this game is not here to single-handedly make up for all of gaming's issues with representation, and suggesting it should be so is likely only to provide fuel for those who erroneously espouse that it is already so.

 

2) Vivienne, as a black woman, not being a LI:

 

I get that some people are disappointed. That's fair--she's pretty awesome, and could have made for an interesting romance if she had been concepted for one. Considering that one could also make an argument about a black woman being present in the game solely to be a fetishized sex object (as if no-one ever made this argument about Isabela?), or that this brings up awkward discussions about skin color vis à vis Josephine, I'm not sure this is a good road to go down. I would hope a character could make for great representation in the game, and do so by being a great character and not solely by whether or not they're available to be romanced, and that this will be evident once someone plays.

Thanks for diving down into the muck to share your thoughts with us, David.  I, at least, look forward to what you and your team have been cooking for us.

[wright1978]

Rather than respond directly, a couple of comments based on a few recent posts:

 

1) Making all (or most, it seems) romances bisexual:

 

That could be done. Of course, since doing so just added on all the extra cinematic work to add the extra genders into the various cinematic conversations (different genders are different heights, requiring extra camera work and a LOT of extra attention in any scene where the two characters interact), that would also mean cutting down on the number of total romances. It is NOT a matter of flipping a switch to add extra options because someone thought that would be more fair... not for genders, not for races. It also means less opportunities to tell new stories, and less variety. So if you're picturing a bonanza where all those romances would now be available to everyone... that was never on the table, and never could be.

 

Also, anyone arguing that straight characters shouldn't exist because "straight people have gotten enough in the past" is going to be summarily ignored. You can have whatever opinion you wish, but this game is not here to single-handedly make up for all of gaming's issues with representation, and suggesting it should be so is likely only to provide fuel for those who erroneously espouse that it is already so.

 

Personally i'd have still vastly preferred the open DA2 approach even if it resulted in less overall number of LI's. I'll endure the current approach even if i don't like it.

[MCG]

Blackwall was perfect for my Inquisitor, now I'm not even sure I'll have a romance.

[Willowhugger]

On my end, I have no problem with Inquisitor-sexuality as an improvement over heteornormality.

HOWEVER, I think it's more representative and progressive to have characters you can say, "Yes, she's a lesbian."

[HK-90210]

I personally found it refreshing.  Queer characters in a fantasy setting who are allowed to be queer without a world of drama and modern homophobia?  Sign me up.  Remember, while heteronormativity may have run strong in historical settings, the explicit acknowledgement of heterosexuality has a very short history (see: http://www.salon.com...e_heterosexual/ ).  To me, it's more realistic to have a setting where queer people are not often acknowledged, but are also not explicitly oppressed.  

 

Agreed. It's a simple fact that as long as most people hold an attraction(though not necessarily an exclusive one) towards the opposite sex, and our species continues to have a biological drive to reproduce, society will stay somewhat heteronormative. Today, it is becoming less so, but no matter how much progress is made, assumptions will still be made that if you're married, your probably married to a member of the opposite gender. It may not be true, just like how not every woman wants to have kids and not every guy really cares about being the primary money-maker. But assumptions like that are made because there are truths behind them. They may not be true in every case, but they are more often than not.

 

I like that Thedas simply has homosexuality not be a big deal. It's still unusual though, given the biological fact that opposite-sex attraction is more common, and there's no way to have children outside of the traditional way in a fantasy setting. That we know of, anyway. So if you want kids, you either have sex with an opposite gender person, or remain childless. And since Thedas seems to have no population crisis at the moment, most people seem to want them. I'm also glad that Thedas retains a little bit of sexism(against both men and women), but not too much. Women can be soldiers(and even commanders), but men can't be priests(except in Tevinter).

 

Besides, if there were no conflict with homosexuality in Thedas, then there would be no conflict focusing on that aspect. A lack of conflict means less story opportunities. Thedas needs conflict if the story is to stay interesting. I absolutely love that Dorian bucks the trend in Tevinter by being gay. Really accentuates his 'renegade' status. Without the conflict with homosexuality, Dorian's orientation would be less interesting and thought-provoking.

[Willowhugger]

Rather than respond directly, a couple of comments based on a few recent posts:

 

1) Making all (or most, it seems) romances bisexual:

 

That could be done. Of course, since doing so just added on all the extra cinematic work to add the extra genders into the various cinematic conversations (different genders are different heights, requiring extra camera work and a LOT of extra attention in any scene where the two characters interact), that would also mean cutting down on the number of total romances. It is NOT a matter of flipping a switch to add extra options because someone thought that would be more fair... not for genders, not for races. It also means less opportunities to tell new stories, and less variety. So if you're picturing a bonanza where all those romances would now be available to everyone... that was never on the table, and never could be.

 

Also, anyone arguing that straight characters shouldn't exist because "straight people have gotten enough in the past" is going to be summarily ignored. You can have whatever opinion you wish, but this game is not here to single-handedly make up for all of gaming's issues with representation, and suggesting it should be so is likely only to provide fuel for those who erroneously espouse that it is already so.

 

2) Vivienne, as a black woman, not being a LI:

 

I get that some people are disappointed. That's fair--she's pretty awesome, and could have made for an interesting romance if she had been concepted for one. Considering that one could also make an argument about a black woman being present in the game solely to be a fetishized sex object (as if no-one ever made this argument about Isabela?), or that this brings up awkward discussions about skin color vis à vis Josephine, I'm not sure this is a good road to go down. I would hope a character could make for great representation in the game, and do so by being a great character and not solely by whether or not they're available to be romanced, and that this will be evident once someone plays.

 

Great insights.

And with 2#, you can't please everybody.

Trying to please someone invites criticism.

But hopefully you will please a lot.

[Raikas]

Blackwall was perfect for my Inquisitor, now I'm not even sure I'll have a romance.

 

How do you know?  About Blackwall, I mean - isn't he the companion that we know the least about?

 

I can understand latching onto the characters that we've seen in other games (or in the books/comics/etc), but this one is still pretty much a mystery, no?

[MCG]

The romances were fine I thought, I think the only problem was the fact that both the race gated happen to be both tightly restricted AND for straight females, one of them should have been Bi and that's my honest opinion

[Willowhugger]

My biggest disapointments for LI NOT related to sexuality?

1. No Cullen/Tal-Vashoth romance.

 

2. Dwarves getting race-gated the most.

 

3. Curiosity over whether being a mage will affect things.

[Ianamus]

I'd honestly rather have 0 LI's and keep Dorian and Sera as homosexual companions than go back to Dragon Age 2's approach. 

[Lady Nuggins]

I find that anti-label talk, presented in that type of articles, frankly naive and working against people with exclusive same sex attractions, meaning gay men and particularly lesbians, given homophobic stereotypes about lesbians that already question legitimacy of their sexuality. Straight people always existed  - their feelings were simply considered as the norm. It's simply untrue that before modern concept of sexuality became widely known, people were more free. Non-straight people were called then "sodomites" and "tribades", etc., which wasn't specifically about gay men and lesbians but about everyone who engaged in same-sex acts, which had to include bisexual people as well, and they were persecuted.

 

The word "tribade" was coined in Ancient Greece for a woman who engaged in sexual contacts with other women. It was thought that she must be some sort of "hermaphrodite", because it wasn't believed that a "normal" woman could do it on its own. It's ironic that ancient Greece is very often cited as an ideal by anti-labels folks.

 

 

The woman interviewed in that article has clear intention to deny that there is some real, non-socially constructed difference between straight and gay people, she even straight up denied legitimacy of lesbian sexuality in that answer to remark about trans men. What's ironic is the fact that homophobes embraced that rhetoric as well, and very often, it's hard to notice any difference between those two groups:

 

http://faithinfemini...on-sexuality-2/

 

I don't consider it "anti-label" so much as an acknowledgement that even heterosexuality is a social construct, not a default setting, and the way we perceive it now is not how it has always been perceived.  I know that these arguments have been coopted by homophobes, but they will coop anything to strengthen their position, and I think it's just as damaging to deny that sexual fluidity exists as it is to deny that lesbianism exists.  And since we're specifically talking about social attitudes towards LGBT people, it seems relevant to discuss the social constructs that surround it, and how those have changed.  But I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on how LGBT people are treated in Thedas.

[lecho_himself]

The high percentage interest in single-sex LI's Sera and Dorian suggests what has been
said before, which is that same-sex romances are not simply 'for LGBT people' but
are enjoyed by many straight people as well.

By curiosity, because I've missed the poll: were the romance options descripted using their gender/race gates or it was a generic question of who would you like to romance if you could choose from ALL listed below?

I ask because it's something that could affect the poll itself. Knowning it was a generic poll for kicks I would picked Sera (I have absolutely no interest in same sex romances or playing as different sex I actually am). But seeing the gates I would probably skip entire poll as I'm not interested in both Josephine and Cassandra.

[Deviija]

That could be done. Of course, since doing so just added on all the extra cinematic work to add the extra genders into the various cinematic conversations (different genders are different heights, requiring extra camera work and a LOT of extra attention in any scene where the two characters interact), that would also mean cutting down on the number of total romances. It is NOT a matter of flipping a switch to add extra options because someone thought that would be more fair... not for genders, not for races. It also means less opportunities to tell new stories, and less variety. So if you're picturing a bonanza where all those romances would now be available to everyone... that was never on the table, and never could be.

 

Completely understood.  I am quite fine with less options overall in favor of a middle ground that everyone can use.  Meaning, if we had to go back to 4 bi options due to resources and zot constraints, just so we could allow everyone access to as much content as possible, I'd be very fine with that.  After all, DA2 offered me 2 romance options for my Gay Hawke and now Inquisition -- even with its sex sexualities making more LIs spread across more people -- is still offering me the same 2 romance option choice for my Gay Inquisitor.  In terms of the bigger picture, when looking at all the LIs as a whole, it looks like a big increase in stories and possibilities. but to a player, one that may only be concerned about the options they are interested in having access to, it can be seen as getting the same amount as before.  

 

This is purely in regards to Love Interests, however.  The diversity in stories, and sexualities, can easily be spread amongst non-romanceable companions, too.  It's not that one must lose out on being able to tell altered versions of these other new stories -- they could just be told from the perspective of a friendship path that everyone has access to rather than a more gated romance path.  In fact, friendship paths being open to everyone allows for more people accessing it and more new story visibility versus a more "gated" romance path, imo.

[MCG]

How do you know? About Blackwall, I mean - isn't he the companion that we know the least about?

Mainly because Iron Bull has been with many others sexually and it's off-putting, plus he's very large and seemingly domineering which is off-putting to me. Then there's Dorian who I have no issue with visually, but is not only a mage but a damn Necromancer, I support the Circle more than the mages too. I just feel Blackwall was not only attractive but also dedicated and well.... normal.

[wright1978]

By curiosity, because I've missed the poll: were the romance options descripted using their gender/race gates or it was a generic question of who would you like to romance if you could choose from ALL listed below?

I ask because it's something that could affect the poll itself. Knowning it was a generic poll for kicks I would picked Sera (I have absolutely no interest in same sex romances or playing as different sex I actually am). But seeing the gates I would probably skip entire poll as I'm not interested in both Josephine and Cassandra.

 

Indeed, i voted for Sera because the question asked 'Please choose one most preferred love interest for you',even though she has been gated away from being available to my preferred inquisitor.

[Sporothrix]

Agreed. It's a simple fact that as long as most people hold an attraction(though not necessarily an exclusive one) towards the opposite sex, and our species continues to have a biological drive to reproduce, society will stay somewhat heteronormative. Today, it is becoming less so, but no matter how much progress is made, assumptions will still be made that if you're married, your probably married to a member of the opposite gender. It may not be true, just like how not every woman wants to have kids and not every guy really cares about being the primary money-maker. But assumptions like that are made because there are truths behind them. They may not be true in every case, but they are more often than not.

 

I like that Thedas simply has homosexuality not be a big deal. It's still unusual though, given the biological fact that opposite-sex attraction is more common, and there's no way to have children outside of the traditional way in a fantasy setting. That we know of, anyway. So if you want kids, you either have sex with an opposite gender person, or remain childless. And since Thedas seems to have no population crisis at the moment, most people seem to want them. I'm also glad that Thedas retains a little bit of sexism(against both men and women), but not too much. Women can be soldiers(and even commanders), but men can't be priests(except in Tevinter).

 

Besides, if there were no conflict with homosexuality in Thedas, then there would be no conflict. A lack of conflict means less story opportunities. Thedas needs conflict if the story is to stay interesting. I absolutely love that Dorian bucks the trend in Tevinter by being gay. Really accentuates his 'renegade' status. Without the conflict with homosexuality, Dorian's orientation would be less interesting and thought-provoking.

 

I find it self contradictory. How can a world be both heteronormative and at the same time, homosexuality not be a big deal?

 

That's why I don't think it's not a big deal, but simple refusal of the devs to really touch this subject, unfortunately making the experience superficial. I have no problem with the fact that the world we play in is heteronormative if only it wasn't pretended that it's not the case.
 

[daveliam]

I thought I'd share how that poll of >3,000 forumites that did the rounds a month ago turned out.

The survey was just for fun and this if how the 8 romances were favoured in respect of the question:

 

'Please choose one most preferred love interest for you'

 

At the close, the most preferred choices for LI among the 8 finally confirmed were: 

• Solas 18.7%
• Cullen 15.1%,
• Sera 13.8%,
• Cassandra 13.5%,
• Dorian 12.9%,
• Iron Bull 12.3%,
• Josephine 8.1% and
• Blackwall 5.6% .

At the point Varric was eliminated his vote was 9.5%.

At the point Vivienne was eliminated, her vote was 5.4%.

 

I think it's nice to see a good spread of interest in all the romances.

It's interesting to me that the two most preferred LI's are the two 'extra' race-gated options.

The high percentage interest in single-sex LI's Sera and Dorian suggests what has been

said before, which is that same-sex romances are not simply 'for LGBT people' but

are enjoyed by many straight people as well.

 

Ah yeah!  I love DATA!

 

I find this really interesting.  I wonder how different those numbers are now.  This represents what we thought based on no race restrictions.  I'm curious to see how the numbers change now that we know who can romance whom.  I nominate you to create a follow up poll.

 

My prediction?  Solas in particular will drop way down.  Possibly Cullen too.  The rest, I suspect will stay about the same.  Perhaps some might increase a bit, like Blackwall. 

 

And with regard to s/s romances:  I'm not sure that those numbers are really that much higher than the LGB gaming population anyway.  This 3% figure that gets thrown around is so highly flawed that it's irrelevant.  I suspect that BSN population probably does have about 13% each of LGB players.  However, I totally agree with your actual point, which is that Sera and Dorian are not just for LGB players.

 

Nice job with this.