392 réponses à ce sujet

[Gothfather]

Nothing against homosexual romances or homosexual people, but if you are creating an ark to ensure the survival of certain species just relocating and finding a new home is not enough as you have to ensure the specimens you take are able to procreate and re-populate the species and until the feminist overlords eliminate the need for males by perfecting the science of creating sperm cells from a female donor's stem cells (something that still has not been achieved in the Mass Effect universe due to the infestation of males that seem to worm their way into the setting) homosexual relationships just aren't a viable means for reproduction.

 

Is this a theme that will ever be explored in the new setting? Perhaps even by including homosexual romances and exploring a theme where the player has to choose between being with somebody they love and sacrificing that love for the good of the colony, with every new frontier new challenges are faced but does the good of the colony come before those you love?

 

This assumes that Homosexual couples can't have children in the future. Seems to be that as we can see homosexual couples having children with our own level of technology this argument is one based on ignorance. All that is need for children is an egg and sperm and an environment for them to grow up in. It is not required that both of the genetic samples come from the romantic couple. The issue isn't fertilization for population growth, it is families. Same sex couples can and do provide the stable environment for children and thus population growth.

 

So there is nothing that limits or prohibits populations growth with same sex couples even without advance technology. Same sex couples are using sperm donors and inseminate at home to carry babies to term now or male couples will both provide the sperm to be mixed up and then give this to a surrogate who takes the child to term. They don't use advance fertility technologies at all. Again the birth of the child isn't the limiting factor it is stable family structure which sexual orientation isn't a factor here.

 

So your entire premiss is poorly thought out. But I suspect most of your threads are trollish in nature to be honest.

[daveliam]

Were they? I wasn't into ME then. But I don't think it was as bad as the backlash against Anders. And if so, how sad. In any case, it totally did not come out of nowhere. Hey, I've played the Horizon mission I also got to tell TIM to mind his own damn business after he snidely asked me about my past relationships (this just after that painful meeting with Kaidan).

 

Yeah, there was pretty significant Kaidan backlash when he was revealed to be bisexual.  In fact, he's still brought up as an example of "fan service".  Again, I think that those people who claim that he never showed signs of s/s attraction prior to ME3 are totally blind and a bit clueless to be honest.

 

 

Tbh BioWare have never actually (to my knowledge) declared a character to be straight. Maybe in banter between two characters. But I can't think of any examples. People usually just assume a character is straight if they're only available to the opposite sex. And the whole reason they're only available to the opposite sex is usually because developers were not comfortable making them otherwise. (Notable exception is DAI, where they purposely made characters straight to please fans who complained about DA2. Because some people getting more options than usual evidently really, really pissed off a very vocal part of the community. Or they just thought lesbians would enjoy Cassandra turning them down; lesbian gamers really appreciate "realism" in games, little known fact.)

 

Have the gay characters declared their sexuality?  Legit question because I can't remember.  I know that Dorian and Sera (I think) explicitly identify as gay in the game.  I know that Juhani and Steve don't (there's just no flirt option for o/s PCs).  But I can't remember Samantha.  Does she have a "No thanks, I'm just into gals" line?

 

 

No one freaked out about Cortez because he never hits on you, plus if you objected to his presence in the game you'd be knowingly admitting you're a straight up homophobe. 

 

People who complain about Anders or Kaidan actually think they are decent, "tolerant" people. Which I guess is actually kind of sad.

 

Actually people have freaked out about Cortez.  I remember getting into an argument with someone on BSN that thought that the fact that you could romance Steve was inappropriate because he felt uncomfortable having a guy checking him out.  There aren't enough eyeroll emojis sometimes......

[Natureguy85]

It is sad that you don't think bisexuals are interesting.

 

Also it is really easy to make such snarky comments if you typically play a straight character so usually EVERY CHARACTER EXCEPT MAYBE ONE is already available to you.

 

You might want to brush up on your reading skills if you're going to be involved in something that's entirely in print. I never said bisexuals aren't interesting. Notice I asked if all characters should be bisexual just so everyone can romance them or if they should be individuals who are different. Or are we not supposed to seek diversity anymore? I didn't mind not being able to romance Traynor. In fact, I loved how, unless I missed it, she never makes any explicit statements about her sexuality, but instead I figured it out from her conversations with EDI. Contrast Steve Cortez who explicitly mentions "my husband". Hopefully it doesn't sound contradictory, but I liked that about Steve too. He just put it out there and it was no big deal.

 

No, trust me. It was the gay thing.

 

It's sort of like saying GamerGate is about "integrity in journalism." Um, no. No it's not.

 

No, I don't trust you because you see what you want to see. I'm not saying those people weren't out there, but there were plenty of other reasons to have issues with Anders. I never followed Gamergate beyond it's initial creation where it was about integrity in journalism. I did hear that it become something nasty but never kept up on the news about it.

 

 

 

Were they? I wasn't into ME then. But I don't think it was as bad as the backlash against Anders. And if so, how sad. In any case, it totally did not come out of nowhere. Hey, I've played the Horizon mission I also got to tell TIM to mind his own damn business after he snidely asked me about my past relationships (this just after that painful meeting with Kaidan). 

 

It was never established in canon that Kaidan was straight, so if fans did respond that way they had absolutely nothing to back it up. They just assumed straight because he was not available to male characters in ME 1&2. Which mainly happened because it was 2007 and the world would have flipped its sh!t if m/m romance were a thing.

 

I couldn't tell you if one was worse than the other. Kaidan never explicitly eliminated bisexuality, but there was no hint of it anywhere. So suddenly hitting on male Shepard in the third game is indeed out of nowhere. However, the more major issue was Shepard.

 

http://www.eurogamer...exual-by-choice

 

Sexuality aside, this article points out something important that many people seem to have a hard time grasping.

 

"In Mass Effect it's more a third-person narrative, where you have a pre-defined character who is who he is, or she is," Muzyka told IGN when asked why Dragon Age: Origins allowed for gay relationships while Mass Effect didn't.

 

"But it's not a wide-open choice matrix. It's more choice on a tactical level with a pre-defined character. So they're different types of narratives, and that's intentional."

 

The Mass Effect games are about "[Commander] Shepard as a defined character with certain approaches and worldviews", Muzyka continued, "So we constrain the choice set somewhat, but enable more tactical choices and enable a deeper, richer personality, because it's more focused around defining one character, it's not as wide open. But that's by choice."

 

Dragon Age, for its part, "is a first-person narrative" where "you are that character at a fundamental level", and that's the reason there's more scope for different relationships.

 

 

 

The point is that Shepard is a more defined character than was the Warden. You are not playing "your" Shepard as much as many like to think.

 

 

 

Tbh BioWare have never actually (to my knowledge) declared a character to be straight. Maybe in banter between two characters. But I can't think of any examples. People usually just assume a character is straight if they're only available to the opposite sex. And the whole reason they're only available to the opposite sex is usually because developers were not comfortable making them otherwise. (Notable exception is DAI, where they purposely made characters straight to please fans who complained about DA2. Because some people getting more options than usual evidently really, really pissed off a very vocal part of the community. Or they just thought lesbians would enjoy Cassandra turning them down; lesbian gamers really appreciate "realism" in games, little known fact.)

 

If that were true, then why do they have some heterosexual characters and some bisexual characters?

 

 

 

 

No one freaked out about Cortez because he never hits on you, plus if you objected to his presence in the game you'd be knowingly admitting you're a straight up homophobe. 

 

People who complain about Anders or Kaidan actually think they are decent, "tolerant" people. Which I guess is actually kind of sad.

 

Actually, I don't recall the details, but I was reading some gay men complaining about Cortez as a bad portrayal of gay men.

 

Anders is anything but tolerant!

 

This assumes that Homosexual couples can't have children in the future. Seems to be that as we can see homosexual couples having children with our own level of technology this argument is one based on ignorance...

 

So your entire premiss is poorly thought out. But I suspect most of your threads are trollish in nature to be honest.

 

All of that could have been explained without being an ass to someone who is merely ignorant. Anyway, the only thing I would question with that solution is if the proper medical equipment would be brought when there is limited space for supplies. I have no idea what's required, so maybe.

[Natureguy85]

 

Okay I guess I didn't feel I had to spell it out but perhapss I do. Romance is an important aspect of the games to some people. If it isn't for you, then okay. That doesn't make you a better gamer than someone else who loves romance. Personally romance is more important to me in DA than in ME, but I'd still be disappointed if I got few or crap options. If you don't care about romance then I'd suggest not talking about it. Also using terms like "pretend romance" is clearly meant to belittle people who love the romances in these games. 

 

And yeah I like a good romance in an action film. Though they often tend to be really crap and uninspiring... usually very heteronormative and eyeroll-inducing. 

 

And again there is a difference between appreciating romance as part of an action film and going to an action film to see the romance. I care about characters. If romance is a part of that, then cool. But you are arguing for romancing a scarecrow because at least you got to romance something.

[Wulfram]

Have the gay characters declared their sexuality?  Legit question because I can't remember.  I know that Dorian and Sera (I think) explicitly identify as gay in the game.  I know that Juhani and Steve don't (there's just no flirt option for o/s PCs).  But I can't remember Samantha.  Does she have a "No thanks, I'm just into gals" line?

Yes, pretty much. Well, she says that Male Shepard isn't her type and points to her earlier comments on the attractiveness of EDI's voice.

[Natureguy85]

Yes, pretty much. Well, she says that Male Shepard isn't her type and points to her earlier comments on the attractiveness of EDI's voice.

 

I really liked the subtlety.

[CuriousArtemis]

Yeah, there was pretty significant Kaidan backlash when he was revealed to be bisexual.  In fact, he's still brought up as an example of "fan service".  Again, I think that those people who claim that he never showed signs of s/s attraction prior to ME3 are totally blind and a bit clueless to be honest.

 

 

Have the gay characters declared their sexuality?  Legit question because I can't remember.  I know that Dorian and Sera (I think) explicitly identify as gay in the game.  I know that Juhani and Steve don't (there's just no flirt option for o/s PCs).  But I can't remember Samantha.  Does she have a "No thanks, I'm just into gals" line?

 

 

 

Actually people have freaked out about Cortez.  I remember getting into an argument with someone on BSN that thought that the fact that you could romance Steve was inappropriate because he felt uncomfortable having a guy checking him out.  There aren't enough eyeroll emojis sometimes......

 

I get butterflies and jiggly feeliings in my fingertips and toes every time I get to the end of Horizon. Cause I know "THAT SCENE" is coming. Sigh.

 

Oh, don't know about the gay characters stating their sexuality!!  Thanks for pointing that out. Of course with gay characters their writers tend to come out and specifically state that they are gay, which doesn't often happen for straight characters (DAI the exception, maybe because at that point straight is no longer default and has to be outright stated).

 

That guy who was made uncomfortable by a video game character checking him out (does Cortez even do that?) should take a page from SECURE IN HIS HETEROSEXUALITY James Vega: "You know you like the view, Esteban!" 

[ModernAcademic]

Nothing against homosexual romances or homosexual people, but if you are creating an ark to ensure the survival of certain species just relocating and finding a new home is not enough as you have to ensure the specimens you take are able to procreate and re-populate the species and until the feminist overlords eliminate the need for males by perfecting the science of creating sperm cells from a female donor's stem cells (something that still has not been achieved in the Mass Effect universe due to the infestation of males that seem to worm their way into the setting) homosexual relationships just aren't a viable means for reproduction.

 

Is this a theme that will ever be explored in the new setting? Perhaps even by including homosexual romances and exploring a theme where the player has to choose between being with somebody they love and sacrificing that love for the good of the colony, with every new frontier new challenges are faced but does the good of the colony come before those you love?

 

If we can have artificial sperms, we can have artificial eggs.

Why not also have artificial wombs where they can grow?

 

Artificial eggs.

Artificial wombs.

 

Artificially generated people.

 

Artificial human beings.

 

Artificial civilizations.

 

Welcome to the future.

[Gothfather]

/snip responses to other people's posts.

 

 

All of that could have been explained without being an ass to someone who is merely ignorant. Anyway, the only thing I would question with that solution is if the proper medical equipment would be brought when there is limited space for supplies. I have no idea what's required, so maybe.

How is speaking the truth being an ass?Look at Queen Skadi's post history. This isn't the first quasi trollish thread started by them.

 

And you don't NEED medical equipment for same sex couples to have a child for christ sake. i just posted showing you don't. It doesn't take any great mental leaps to figure this out, hell you can find out these things by reading local news papers. There is no special fraking equipment needed today for same sex couples to have a child. It isn't rocket science, you don't need advance fertility technologies. So nothing about same sex couples precludes child raising which is by FAR the greater investment in time and resources then fertilization which in comparison takes no time at all. Fertilization is the least problematic aspect of population growth, gestation and 18 years AFTER the bloody birth are the limiting factors.

 

This entire thread is started so people can argue out of ignorance about a completely pointless topic to the game. It is Queen Skadi being a troll.

[Natureguy85]

How is speaking the truth being an ass?Look at Queen Skadi's post history. This isn't the first quasi trollish thread started by them.

 

And you don't NEED medical equipment for same sex couples to have a child for christ sake. i just posted showing you don't. It doesn't take any great mental leaps to figure this out, hell you can find out these things by reading local news papers. There is no special fraking equipment needed today for same sex couples to have a child. It isn't rocket science, you don't need advance fertility technologies. So nothing about same sex couples precludes child raising which is by FAR the greater investment in time and resources then fertilization which in comparison takes no time at all. Fertilization is the least problematic aspect of population growth, gestation and 18 years AFTER the bloody birth are the limiting factors.

 

This entire thread is started so people can argue out of ignorance about a completely pointless topic to the game. It is Queen Skadi being a troll.

 

Obviously speaking the truth isn't being an ass since I specifically said you could convey the information without being an ass. It was about the delivery, particularly the end. You said you "suspected" most of Skadi's threads to be trollish in nature with no supporting evidence. I am not interested in looking at their post history. Make the case. However, that's not really relevant to our discussion.

 

Unless the two men or two women are each having sex with whoever will be the other parent, some sort of medical equipment would be used for the artificial insemination or transferring the embryo to the surrogate. But as I said, I don't know if it's anything more than just an every day syringe. At any rate, we are not talking about a situation where there are lots of kids that need stable homes. We are talking about a mass exodus with limited space and  the need for repopulation. With all other things being equal, you are going to select people who can have their own children quickly, including picking more women than men as described by the Architect in The Matrix Reloaded.

 

The real argument is that this could be all business. A gay man or a lesbian woman are just as capable of having children with each other and then going home to their respective partners who also did the same thing earlier in the day. You'd want young, fertile people.

[Pasquale1234]

It's not necessarily that a character being bi would "ruin" the character, it's that the particular character is straight (or whatever else) just because.

Just because the devs set a gate.

How would Cortez have been different if he'd been grieving the loss of a wife instead of his husband?

How would Traynor have been different if she would have been interested in romancing a male Shepard?

How would Ashley have been different if female Shepard could have romanced her?
 

You have to decide if you want a world of interesting, varied people or if everyone should be bi so you can have your pretend romance with any or all of them?

Here we are - again - with the implication that the sexuality assigned to a fictional character somehow defines the world as more or less interesting / varied.

Not to mention that we're not talking about the entire world and all of its inhabitants - just those characters specifically designated as LI options. The sexuality of any of the non-LI NPCs can only be assumed at best. Do they all need to run around with "I'm straight/bi/pan/gay/ace/demi/etc." badges in order to be perceived as interesting and varied?

[Natureguy85]

Just because the devs set a gate.

How would Cortez have been different if he'd been grieving the loss of a wife instead of his husband?

How would Traynor have been different if she would have been interested in romancing a male Shepard?

How would Ashley have been different if female Shepard could have romanced her?
 

Here we are - again - with the implication that the sexuality assigned to a fictional character somehow defines the world as more or less interesting / varied.

Not to mention that we're not talking about the entire world and all of its inhabitants - just those characters specifically designated as LI options. The sexuality of any of the non-LI NPCs can only be assumed at best. Do they all need to run around with "I'm straight/bi/pan/gay/ace/demi/etc." badges in order to be perceived as interesting and varied?

 

 

Each character really wouldn't have been different from themselves, but it is one way they are different from each other, which is why I don't care what they are individually. However if they were all made bisexual, it would be clear that decision was made to make them all romancable for everyone rather than it actually being part of their character design. The difference is if the focus was on writing a good character or writing a romance object for the PC. However, I do see your point in that, as far as development time, it wouldn't take much more to make sure they weren't gated.

 

While we're on that subject, what about race-gating? Is that ok or not?

 

The fact that we're talking about a limited group would make it all the more strange if they all happened to be bisexual, would it not? As far as badges, you'll have to go ask the people who care what sexuality everyone is and want to know all about it. Or ask the people who wear it on their sleeves and want pats on the head for it.

[Pasquale1234]

Each character really wouldn't have been different from themselves, but it is one way they are different from each other, which is why I don't care what they are individually. However if they were all made bisexual, it would be clear that decision was made to make them all romancable for everyone rather than it actually being part of their character design.

And that matters... how exactly?

Except for the rare occasion when something about a character or his/her backstory is sexuality specific, sexuality is arbitrarily assigned to fictional characters.
 

The difference is if the focus was on writing a good character or writing a romance object for the PC.

Sexuality has nothing to do with that. In fact, I'd say that making all potential LIs bi/pan would reduce it, because fewer total LIs would be needed to provide options for everyone.
 

While we're on that subject, what about race-gating? Is that ok or not?

Not relevant to ME.
 

The fact that we're talking about a limited group would make it all the more strange if they all happened to be bisexual, would it not?

Not really.

[CuriousArtemis]

How would Cortez have been different if he'd been grieving the loss of a wife instead of his husband?

How would Traynor have been different if she would have been interested in romancing a male Shepard?

How would Ashley have been different if female Shepard could have romanced her?

 

You can't ask questions like that; it makes BSN heads explode.

 

Sexuality has nothing to do with that. In fact, I'd say that making all potential LIs bi/pan would reduce it, because fewer total LIs would be needed to provide options for everyone.

 

[AresKeith]

Oh boy we're back to this dead horse

[Grieving Natashina]

I'm going to sidestep yet another conversation about toggles and the like. Nice to see David hasn't lost his touch on this one. I do agree with him on one point: ME writers, please stop with the random Asari touching. Liara made sense, but I could at least control/befriend her. I actually enjoyed the Liara romance, but the lady from Feros touching my Shep's face uninvited was not welcome. I would have taken some regengade points to tell her to screw off. <growl>

Now, as far as the topic goes, I would say no. It doesn't sound that selfish imho, but I don't think it's well thought out. It sounds like a confusion between sexuality and fertility. While there is ongoing studies regarding the hormone levels and links to sexuality, it's far from concluded. As a result, I won't use that as a tried and true fact. I can say that there is still plenty of fertile gay men and lesbian women out there, just as there is a lot of infertile straight men and women around. Some ladies are capable of getting pregant easily, and could be viable as a surrogate and/or donor, same with gay men getting a woman pregnant. That isn't some future technology, that's available today (granted, at one helluva price for eggs.) So I can't see any LGB+ folks being excluded. Shoot, I could see an asexual choosing to get pregant this way. Again, it seems like folks are fertile or infertile no matter the sexuality they identify with.

Also, I don't see sexuality as one of the deciding factors in any sort of ark. I think fertility would be a factor, but I think that skill will be probably be the biggest one. This ship is going to need pretty much everyone that has talent for something. They would need cooks, and I could see a need for people proficient in multi-racial cooking. There would be an obvious need for scientists of a lot of displines; historians of all of the races so their cultures aren't lost. Baby sitters to watch over the children, because I can picture most parents working many hours a day, at least at first. Janitors and farmers; law enforcement; firefighters, ect ect ect.

There is no reason to exclude LGBT+ characters from the ark/ship, because there isn't a link between who you do (or do not) like to get freaky with, and/or gender identity, and what you can do well. Yes, there is a lot of various jobs that have openly LGBT+ folks more than others, but that's due to the culture surrounding these occupations.

Finally, may I say that this is a little unsettling in general. I'm not coming down on the OP themselves. They've been nothing but polite and articulate. I do honestly appreciate it. However, the post has this tone like hetero people are worth the most if they choose (or can have) children. If anything, I could see some situational population control, so having only really fertile straight couples could potentially be a hindrance depending upon the circumstances.

I think that any future BW game is going to have a mix of sexualities and examples of the mortal condition. It has before, and I can't see it stopping now.

PS: It's really amusing to still read the folks that insist that only LGBT+ folks try out LGBT romances. Aside from the GIRL character that romances Liara. GIRL=Guy In Real Life. Nothing wrong with that either, but straight men play gay men/gay romances just like some straight women have done a straight male Shep. <shrug>

Edit: Made a sentence clearer. I'm still getting used to the new keyboard for my tablet.

[Kierro Ren]

PS: It's really amusing to still read the folks that insist that only LGBT+ folks try out LGBT romances. Aside from the GIRL character that romances Liara. GIRL=Guy In Real Life. Nothing wrong with that either, but straight men play gay men/gay romances just like some straight women have done a straight male Shep. <shrug>

 

My signature proves this with Garrus ^-^ and Tali. Just because I have a guy mate, doesn't mean I HAVE to have LGBT characters. I can play straighty straights. Mainly, I love the connection between the characters, rather then their sexuality.

[Grieving Natashina]

My signature proves this with Garrus ^-^ and Tali. Just because I have a guy mate, doesn't mean I HAVE to have LGBT characters. I can play straighty straights. Mainly, I love the connection between the characters, rather then their sexuality.

100% agreed. I think a good story triumphs a lot of boundries. That being said, there is posters I've read before that aren't comfortable playing the opposite sex or romancing as a different sexuality than their own. That isn't a bad thing; I had trouble getting into playing a male Shep.

Many posters, regardless of sexuality or gender, would prefer to have LGBT characters around, and not just in the background. Several are indifferent and think the whole hooplah surrounding it is silly. As long as they feel they played a good game, it's a take or leave sort of thing. A few have a real problem with it, and want to express their POV as well.

I do feel that even if the new IP that BW is working on excludes player romances, that doesn't mean that LGBT characters will suddenly cease to exist. Many stories have romances in the background if nothing else. Like a gay character causally mentioning having a husband, or a (non-Asari) woman mourning their female mate. Stuff like that. The player couldn't romance them in this scenario. However, I can't see every single mention of straight or LGB+ love stories disppearing altogether from the NPCs or from some quests here and there. I can also easily see LGBT+ party members still around, and still mentioning their past.

This is coming from someone that would highly prefer if the ME and DA teams keep the romances in their IP. On the other hand, if they chose not to take that route in the new IP, I wouldn't mind either. I do believe that this odd notion floating around here and there that LGBT+ characters and party members would suddenly cease any/all mentions of a partner, kids, ect, just because there is no player romances at all, pretty ridiculous. It would be just like all straight characters cease all mention of anything to do love. Even the COD games mention the occasional child and/lover with their NPCs and PCs.

I owe you a like.

[Jimbo_Gee79]

I am firmly of the opinion that relationships in RPG's need to be removed altogether. They don't add anything to the game and sexuality is becoming far too prevalent in video games. 

[Grieving Natashina]

@Jimbo Gee:

First off, my apologizes for a lack of a direct quote. The quoting system is being a pain and not working correctly on my end.

In this case, since we are dealing with the surviors of an intergalactic war on a giant ship, love, romance, children and sexuality would naturally come up. As it would with any sort of large traveling colony, both in fiction and in real life.

Look, I can understand you're burn out on the subject of sexuality in games. However, considering that LGBT+ content is a vast minority in games, it's easy to avoid in most RPG games. Unless you really have a problem with any/all romances in any video game ever, regardless of sexuality. Like when Mario has mentioned his love for Peach, a COD character mentioning an old girlfriend, things of that sort. Then I'll admit that I can't understand that, but I respect your viewpoint.

I'm not going to come down on you for it. I do think that BioWare is very very unlikely going to listen to such requests, but I'm not going to begrudge your point of view. Hopefully you've been playing games that you enjoy from other companies, or some classic BioWare.

[BabyPuncher]

It would probably be smart to drop the 'T' in LGBT. I don't think BioWare is quite stupid enough to attempt that at this point. And that seems to be a little more of a thing with the DA team than the ME team in any case.

[9TailsFox]

I am firmly of the opinion that relationships in RPG's need to be removed altogether. They don't add anything to the game and sexuality is becoming far too prevalent in video games. 

Agree and next we should remove cheese and killing people it adds nothing to the story. Actually in ME we should remove all character except Anders, counsel and Saren/reapers only they add something to the story everything else can be removed.

[BabyPuncher]

I have no idea what other silly nonsense you're on about, but I didn't say they aren't daring enough yet. I said they're not stupid enough yet. Even the most self-identified 'progressive' of fiction creators is generally not stupid enough to make such a blunder. Because that's what equality is, of course. Idiocy.

 

Like a chunk of human rationality stubbornly refuses to be extinguished in their fragile little minds. Even in most 'progressive' fiction, they still completely and totally refuse to represent the real marginalized people. And that, of course, is all it takes to prove they really have no interest in 'equality' at all.

 

That's all just simple facts.

[Grieving Natashina]

You should probably tell that to Manveer Heir on the ME team. He would likely disagree with you. Time will tell regardless. <shrug>

Anyhow, since the OP is focused on limiting/excluding sexuality based more around reproduction, we should probably stick with that. I'm not going to change my wording, just like I'm not out to try to change your opinion. Not up for a debate tonight, but I know you'll have plenty of takers.

For now, I think I've said my piece. OP, I appreciate you starting this thread so politely. It has sparked a pretty productive conversation, which is always good. I don't have to agree with someone to enjoy a good conversation starter.

[BabyPuncher]

Oh, no, no, no. These are just simple facts, see? I don't have to speculate. I don't need conviction. I have evidence. You do understand how evidence works, yes?

 

All I have to do is look at all the people in high positions who gleefully squeal in support of 'equality' and minorities and so on and so forth. How it's never okay to exclude someone for being part of a certain group. And then look at pretty much every work of fiction in existence that does exactly and precisely that.

 

Hmm. Let's think. What conclusion do these do these facts lead to about Mr. Heir's little speech? About all the people who rally in support for 'equality'?