A) I've already said that I think that not addressing an issue is sufficient evidence that the institution has no opinion, and therefore doesn't care. If the Chantry felt that homosexuality was counter to its principles, there would be a prohibition. You yourself said that it fits the model of "thou shalts/thou shalt nots." If we are to go with your logic, does it not stand to reason that not even mentioning something can be construed as being okay with it? I fail to see the logic that suggests that "thou shalt engage in homosexuality" must be in place in the absence of "thou shalt not engage in homosexuality," in order for the Chantry to be said to not have an issue with it. The lack of a prohibition can be reasonably said to be a tacit admission of acceptance. If nothing else, it proclaims that the issue is not one which the Chantry feels is worth codifying, which, as I said before, sufficiently proclaims that homosexuality is not viewed by the church as being antithetical to its doctrinal theology. If it were, then there would be a "thou shalt not" prohibition.
Your assertions about the Chantry not having a position on gender superiority is inherently flawed for the same reason. Just because real world religions do, and just because the Chantry is analogous to one of them, doesn't mean it follows that the Chantry would have or should have followed the same pattern--especially since, unless I am mistaken, the question of gender superiority is not always initially a fundamental characteristic of a religion*. That said, it is actually the case that the Chantry favors women over men. i don't have the lore available to me off hand, but I've seen it before, that there are hints that because Andraste was a woman, and because her betrayer was a man, that there is an inherent, albeit understated, assumption of female superiority. It is, again, very subtle. The most obvious implication is the matriarchal hierarchy of the Chantry, but even without that, the theology lends itself well to such a belief, and with it, that belief is definitely reinforced.
....
B ) On that last point: I strongly object to your assertion that the matriarchal structure of the Chantry was a marketing decision intended not to alienate Bioware's women fanbase. If you're going to make such a claim, you might as well say that the entire damned story was written with that marketing decision in mind. You're taking your assumptions about the Chantry being analogous to a real world religion to an unreasonable degree at that point, because you are essentially claiming that because of your presumption that it does, or should, follow the same real world pattern in exactitude as a result, that every point on which it does not must perforce be purely the result of marketing. I reject that, and I resent it, too. There is no question that Bioware has taken steps to be more inclusive in trying to expand its fanbase and not to irritate subsets of its existing one. But it does not in the least follow that because of that, that is the reason why we have the story we do, with a Chantry written around a female god/prophet.
Yet another well thought out counter argument. It's actually a pleasure to read how you disagree with me!
In response to A: I strongly disagree with your assertion of "The lack of a prohibition can be reasonably said to be a tacit admission of acceptance. " The fact that ALL religions keep on piling on more "Thou shalts" and "Thou shalt nots" over the centuries reveals that subjects not previously stipulated are just subjects that they hadn't gotten around to formally pronouncing whether they _should_ be Does or Don'ts. A close examination of practically every existing REAL religion shows that the religions' leaders feel obligated to pass judgement on pretty much EVERYTHING about how their adherents live their lives and worship the specific deity. So just because there isn't an existing stricture does NOT equate that the Church is fine with it _or_ that the Church feels is so obvious a Do Not that it doesn't need to be formally stated... for now. If it becomes a burgeoning problem to the Church's leaders, then they will issue a new Papal Bull or whatever.
In response to B : I think you've misconstrued what I said. I was actually striving to say that the Chantry is absolutely ambivalent in regards to gender superior in either direction. The fact that the Divine is a woman is more a matter of tradition, the current Divine being an image of Andraste rather than a stipulation that women are superior to men in leadership roles. Much like how the Dalai Lama and the Pope are always males. (Well, except for Pope Joan maybe. ;^) The BioWare Marketing decision to present absolute gender equality is actually just the same Marketing decision that all other developers have adopted. As the numbers of female gamers grew as the overall market grew, it became obvious that it was demeaning to that significant market share by offering only male main characters or to suggest that female characters are inferior because they are "the weaker sex". Initially, gender balancing amongst developers _did_ have female characters did automatically have lower Strength, but were compensated with higher Dexterity. That quickly switched to absolutely no Attribute differentiation because many consumers perceived an inherent bias because in their opinions, one Attribute was more useful than another. It became necessary to make the two genders absolutely equal, at least during the character creation phase. So, ultimately a Marketing decision rather than any kind of mirror of historical Reality.
All ^^that said, my contention is that to make any religion appear fully realistic, it would behoove designers to look at common themes that appear in very nearly every historical religion. Two subjects in particular are homosexuality which nearly every religion outright condemns (until recently) or at a minimum frowns upon. The other is the subject of gender superiority, the large majority of religions specifying that men should be dominant. These items of dogma weren't so much handed down by God as they are actually a reflection of outstanding societal mores. And pretty much every historical religion have weighed in on these subjects, so their conspicuous absence in Chantry lore effectively makes the Chantry look more UNrealistic. Which even though this pointedly a Fantasy game, there is a desire to make it look fully plausible in it's development and execution. That is, a world much like our own, but wherein magic works. Of course, BioWare has its hands tied because to include those more realistic elements means risking alienating a significant percentage of consumers. So, ultimately the reason that the Chantry does NOT directly address those issues is because of a Marketing decision.
Retour en haut
just remained single through the whole thing. It wasn't so bad..being a "single" champion of Kirkwall considering everything that had happened to her. Plus there were no real romanceable options IMO to pursue.
