194 réponses à ce sujet

[Heimdall]

If they ask questions, they should be respectful. And if they want to be educated, there are groups for that, organizations, loads of materials on the internet, explaining the terminology, transition, etc. Considering most people know how to use google, it really is not an issue for curious people to get the information they want.

Assuming the people in question know what to look for, but really answering the question can be as simple as that, calmly directing people to relevant resources that would help them understand.  Or simply explain, politely, that their question was too personal and why it was inappropriate.  Do not attribute to malice what can be attributed to thoughtlessness.  Understanding is generated through dialogue, not preaching.

Alternatively, biting someone's head off for an ignorant question might put them off pursuing the issue any further or educating themselves about it. My original point in all this was basically that getting angry and defensive doesn't really help anyone.

[Abyss108]

Assuming the people in question know what to look for, but really answering the question can be as simple as that, calmly directing people to relevant resources that would help them understand.

Alternatively, biting someone's head off for an ignorant question might put them off pursuing the issue any further or educating themselves about it. My original point in all this was basically that getting angry and defensive doesn't really help anyone.

 

And why should it be this person's responsibility to better the world when they are just trying to live their life? I don't have to answer private questions about myself "for a better world" when I meet someone. I don't have to deal with people "accidently" insulting me every day because they dont realise it's rude to ask about a person's private life. No one else should have to deal with that either.

[Heimdall]

And why should it be this person's responsibility to better the world when they are just trying to live their life? I don't have to answer private questions about myself "for a better world" when I meet someone. I don't have to deal with people "accidently" insulting me every day because they dont realise it's rude to ask about a person's private life. No one else should have to deal with that either.

As I said several times, you have no obligation to answer these questions and you are perfectly free to tell people to screw themselves.  I simply wish to state that there are consequences to this, however, and they generally don't further understanding or greater awareness.  Sticking your head in the sand and screaming "I shouldn't have to live in a world like this!" is emotionally validating but ultimately an unhelpful position that doesn't improve your own situation or anyone else's.  If these questions bother you, you can instead explain to the person asking why the question is inappropriate (Ideally in a manner that doesn't belittle them or talk down to them, people are most respectful when they don't feel like your assuming the worst of them)

[AlanC9]

I: You don't have any problems with him being a woman?
IB: He's not a woman.

(snip)

I don't see much head biting in this one either. The question is a legit one, seeing as how many get their feather ruffled about Krems identity,

It's legit, but it's also clueless. I mean, would anyone who's met the Iron Bull think that he'd actually have a problem with that?

Though I fully support letting the PC be clueless. And rhetorically, it's more or less equivalent to asking why he doesn't have a problem with it, which is how Bull answers.

[vbibbi]

 

Him being her isn't an issue?

I: You don't have any problems with him being a woman?

IB: He's not a woman.

IB: Look, you and I have to walk carefully so we don't accidentally break the furniture or the elves (Qunari)

IB: Look, I've got horns. You've got pointy ears and those freaky, big elf eyes. (Elf)

IB: Look, I've got horns. You only come up to my knee, and you can't dream. (Dwarf)

IB: Look, I've got horns. You can shoot fire out of your ass. (Mage, human)

IB: Look, I've got horns. You've got a magic mark on your hand that makes demons pop out of the sky. (Non mage, human Quizzy)

IB: We're probably not the best people to go around deciding what's normal.

IB: Krem's a good man. I don't give a nug's ass that it's a little harder for him to [take a leak] standing up.

 

I don't see much head biting in this one either. The question is a legit one, seeing as how many get their feather ruffled about Krems identity, Bull's response is also a legit one, seeing as Krem is his buddy and he's sick of people assuming he minds Krems gender identity. He's only harsh in the "He's not a woman line", the rest is a more chill, trying to explain his point line. He's pretty chill during all those lines. (And nicely diverse depending on your race).

Bull doesn't even get mad, his tone is completely chill and there is no approval drop. 

 

But yes. I was focusing on a wrong conversation. But it's nice to have transcripts of the conversations when arguing about them yes?

---

As for the interview. It's interesting. I liked the Garrus valentines bit. 

 

Well the question the PC asks is bad and awkwardly phrased, so I'm not a fan of that and wished there were a better option. But the options in IB's dialogue based on race seems a bit harsh and hypocritical. First, he's pointing out racial features that are "weird" about the PC, and that because we're "weird" we shouldn't be allowed to ask any questions about someone else's "weirdness." That seems very judgy and close minded to me. It's like he's aggressively shutting down the questions by drawing attention to the PC's "flaws." It sounds like "Hey, you're not that attractive, either, so I wouldn't be talking about my friend's attractiveness."

 

I know that's not the intention of the conversation, but I think that can be seen to be part of the issue with IB's approach.

 

It's not someones job to have to sit there and answer dumb ignorent questions from everyone in their life, especially when those questions could be answered with a quick Google search. From the questioners point of view, it's only a few quick questions, but the person you are questioning has probably been asked these not-purposely offensive questions a million times before. It's not a few minutes of explaining, it's a few minutes of explaining to every single person they meet, whilst every one of those people assumes offensive things about them and shows they can't actually assed to go look up the answers to these questions themselves.

 

Now, it might be slightly harder to find the answers to those questions in Thedas with the lack of Internet, but if a hundred people asked me the same offensive question, I'd probably not be in the best mood when person one hundred and one shows up and wants me to answer the same question again.

 

Are we talking real life or the game? I already said it's a more difficult situation in game, in real life the person can find any information they want by themselves.

 

One person's desire to learn something, doesn't mean they have a right to demand time and answers from someone else about their personal life whilst insulting them. Just because one person has more of an understanding of a subject doesn't mean they are obliged to explain it to every other person in the world who wants to know.

 

And why should it be this person's responsibility to better the world when they are just trying to live their life? I don't have to answer private questions about myself "for a better world" when I meet someone. I don't have to deal with people "accidently" insulting me every day because they dont realise it's rude to ask about a person's private life. No one else should have to deal with that either.

Yeah asking to learn more about transgenderism doesn't equate to asking someone "what's in their pants." There is a lot more to it than that, and you're reducing people's ignorance to focusing on genitalia.

 

I agree, no one should feel obligated to educate others about themselves, and it's probably very stressful for trans individuals in today's world if they are constantly being questioned about their lives. That can't be fun, and I empathize. But you can't have your cake and eat it, too. You can't say "I don't have to answer your questions!" and then turn around and say "why is everyone so ignorant?! people should know better!"

 

Yeah, hopefully the masses will be more educated about trans issues soon, but as Heimdall is pointing out, respectful dialogue is the fastest way to achieve that, not stonewalling questions and telling people to go somewhere else for information.

 

Honestly, it comes across as "How dare you ask me any questions?!" and automatically being offended. Can't you say instead "that is personal and I would rather not discuss it(/but thank you for being respectful in trying to better understand this part of my life)"?

[AlanC9]

But the options in IB's dialogue based on race seems a bit harsh and hypocritical. First, he's pointing out racial features that are "weird" about the PC, and that because we're "weird" we shouldn't be allowed to ask any questions about someone else's "weirdness." That seems very judgy and close minded to me. It's like he's aggressively shutting down the questions by drawing attention to the PC's "flaws." It sounds like "Hey, you're not that attractive, either, so I wouldn't be talking about my friend's attractiveness."

This is really confused, even backwards. The point is that these things are not flaws in the first place.

[vbibbi]

"Freaky big elf eyes" doesn't sound complimentary to me.

[Biotic Apostate]

Assuming the people in question know what to look for, but really answering the question can be as simple as that, calmly directing people to relevant resources that would help them understand.  Or simply explain, politely, that their question was too personal and why it was inappropriate.  Do not attribute to malice what can be attributed to thoughtlessness.  Understanding is generated through dialogue, not preaching.

Alternatively, biting someone's head off for an ignorant question might put them off pursuing the issue any further or educating themselves about it. My original point in all this was basically that getting angry and defensive doesn't really help anyone.

I think you're greatly exaggerating the difficulty of finding useful information. A quick read through 2-3 wikipedia entries would answer a lot of the questions people have. You can even enter the whole question you have. Someone who wants to be educated has to take some initiative, not wait for ready answers.

 

You're also arguing from one side only. Constantly being asked those questions, however well meaning, is emotionally draining. It is perfectly reasonable that a trans person may not really be comfortable discussing that. But I do agree that aggressive responses do little, and a reading recommendation might be the best solution.

[In Exile]

Honestly I felt like it was a little out of character for him, thus it felt more like the writer was preaching to me than Iron Bull being reasonable.  Especially since Dragon Age hasn't had such outbursts before, it felt out of place especially in a world that tends to be very accepting of about issues concerning gender outside of tevinter (unless you want to be a male priest).

 

And even if it is in character, that kind of unreasonable defensiveness is still unpleasant and alienating.  I really don't think it was Bioware's best choice for a scene intended to introduce a positive transgender character: Meeting curiosity and the desire to understand with hostility.

 

It's not out of character. Krem is essential to the IB's character (as are the rest of the Chargers). His relationship with Krem (and the Chargers) exemplifies his tenuous link to the Qun, The essence of the Qun is about certainty re: your identity. Krem has that certainty. The IB doesn't. He's protective of Krem from the start - he's blind in one eye because of him. We can have a longer discussion re: the IB's character if this post isn't clear. 

 

As to the scene, I don't think it was designed to be a PSA, notwithstanding what people here say (particularly detractors). The IB reacted in character, and part of reacting in character is overreacting toward a perceived thread to his Chargers. He's overprotective of them - we see the same thing in Demands of the Qun and the task assigned to them. 

 

Note the way Krem himself reacts to your questions, versus the way the IB reacts. 

 

See, for me, it was the opposite. It wasn't Bull's tone that bothered me - he's just defending his friend. In fact, I like that he does it in that sense. What I definitely didn't like, was railroading my Inquisitor into saying something stupid, just so Bull could do it. It was forced.

 

I'm aware these are optional questions, but for someone who is a completionist and likes to ask everything, it really irks me when they phrase it in a way I'd never say in real life, because I'd find it insulting. And more than that, there was simply no reason to phrase the Inquisitor's questions in any way close to hostile, when a simple, neutral, inquisitive (ha) phrasing would have worked fine or better.

 

It was also the opposite in the sense that it didn't really change my opinion of the characters so much as it made me annoyed at Bioware.

 

What was the line? Was the paraphrase unclear? I thought the paraphrase was pretty clear it was going be an dumb line. 

[In Exile]

If they come from a region were circumcision is uncommon and something related to the subject(ex: converted to Judaism) came up, I probably would.

 

And you genuinely think "Why the hell are you asking me that!?" would be an unreasonable reaction to this weird and forward question?

[vbibbi]

I think you're greatly exaggerating the difficulty of finding useful information. A quick read through 2-3 wikipedia entries would answer a lot of the questions people have. You can even enter the whole question you have. Someone who wants to be educated has to take some initiative, not wait for ready answers.

 

You're also arguing from one side only. Constantly being asked those questions, however well meaning, is emotionally draining. It is perfectly reasonable that a trans person may not really be comfortable discussing that. But I do agree that aggressive responses do little, and a reading recommendation might be the best solution.

I thought this was a discussion of the Inquisitor asking IB and Krem, not about the real world. There aren't such resources in Thedas, it's basically only asking people who already have knowledge.

[In Exile]

Assuming the people in question know what to look for, but really answering the question can be as simple as that, calmly directing people to relevant resources that would help them understand.  Or simply explain, politely, that their question was too personal and why it was inappropriate.  Do not attribute to malice what can be attributed to thoughtlessness.  Understanding is generated through dialogue, not preaching.

Alternatively, biting someone's head off for an ignorant question might put them off pursuing the issue any further or educating themselves about it. My original point in all this was basically that getting angry and defensive doesn't really help anyone.

 

I don't think people have an obligation to cure someone's ignorance. I think that this attitude is deeply problematic. The fact that people have been sheltered - or not exposed - to something does not mean that the first person they meet has some obligation to act as a representative for an entire group of people and give them an on-site educational lesson, or "direct" them to educational resources as if this was an information booth. 

[Biotic Apostate]

I thought this was a discussion of the Inquisitor asking IB and Krem, not about the real world. There aren't such resources in Thedas, it's basically only asking people who already have knowledge.

The conversation went to real life examples a little while back. Even on the first page someone asked about surgery. I doubt sex reassignment surgery is something that happens in Thedas.

[vbibbi]

I don't think people have an obligation to cure someone's ignorance. I think that this attitude is deeply problematic. The fact that people have been sheltered - or not exposed - to something does not mean that the first person they meet has some obligation to act as a representative for an entire group of people and give them an on-site educational lesson, or "direct" them to educational resources as if this was an information booth. 

No one is saying there is an obligation. I agree that no one should be required to educate someone on issues they don't understand. But you also have to realize that if people ask questions, whether they are respectful or poorly worded, if their questions are met with rudeness or criticism, that's not helping anyone. No one is required to be a walking educational pamphlet, but being polite, even if firmly telling the questioner to mind their own business, goes a lot farther than completely shutting someone out.

[AlanC9]

"Freaky big elf eyes" doesn't sound complimentary to me.

But we both know that Bull doesn't personally think that's a flaw, any more than he thinks that his own horns are a flaw.

[Heimdall]

I don't think people have an obligation to cure someone's ignorance. I think that this attitude is deeply problematic. The fact that people have been sheltered - or not exposed - to something does not mean that the first person they meet has some obligation to act as a representative for an entire group of people and give them an on-site educational lesson, or "direct" them to educational resources as if this was an information booth. 

I specifically said earlier that I don't think people have an obligation to educate others.  What I'm saying is that such sheltered ignorance is better met with polite correction (Or at least a polite refusal to answer) rather than aggressive condemnation.

[Dai Grepher]

Him being her isn't an issue?

 

IB: Look, I've got horns. You can shoot fire out of your ass. (Mage, human)

 

 

IB: We're probably not the best people to go around deciding what's normal.

IB: Krem's a good man. I don't give a nug's ass that it's a little harder for him to [take a leak] standing up.

 

I don't see much head biting in this one either. The question is a legit one, seeing as how many get their feather ruffled about Krems identity, Bull's response is also a legit one, seeing as Krem is his buddy and he's sick of people assuming he minds Krems gender identity. He's only harsh in the "He's not a woman line", the rest is a more chill, trying to explain his point line. He's pretty chill during all those lines. (And nicely diverse depending on your race).

Bull doesn't even get mad, his tone is completely chill and there is no approval drop. 

 

That's the one. I found it off-putting as well. Bull's tone is condescending. It could have easily been said in a way that was nonchalant. Going on to say I shoot fire out of my ass (rude, untrue) and that because of this I'm not qualified to use my mind to determine what fits the definition of "normal" and what doesn't, when in fact the question was what is true or false, is lecturing and condescending.

 

So, homosexuality can be compared to adultery and smoking now. Yeah, that's nice.

 

Actually I compared it to strongly held opinions.

 

The adultery reference made the point that most people don't end a friendship just because they find something out about the person that they don't like. That's not a comparison. Adultery is an example of something most agree is bad, and thus illustrates the character of the person who maintains the friendship in spite of that thing perceived as bad.

 

The smoking question was also not a comparison. I asked if the same standard (agree with what I do) would apply to everything that the person does. Must we accept every behavior and action of the friend in order to have the friendship?

 

If one of my "friends" said they were disgusted by me for falling in love with somebody of the same sex and then started likening it to adultery I'd be finding myself a new friend.

 

Just sayin

 

Well that's not the scenario I presented, though I think your reaction to that would also be incorrect. My scenario was about a person who is disgusted by a behavior, but still maintains the friendship with the one who acts out that behavior and accepts that person regardless.

 

It's not someones job to have to sit there and answer dumb ignorent questions from everyone in their life, especially when those questions could be answered with a quick Google search. From the questioners point of view, it's only a few quick questions, but the person you are questioning has probably been asked these not-purposely offensive questions a million times before. It's not a few minutes of explaining, it's a few minutes of explaining to every single person they meet, whilst every one of those people assumes offensive things about them and shows they can't actually assed to go look up the answers to these questions themselves.

 

Now, it might be slightly harder to find the answers to those questions in Thedas with the lack of Internet, but if a hundred people asked me the same offensive question, I'd probably not be in the best mood when person one hundred and one shows up and wants me to answer the same question again.

 

Do you have proof that Google exists in Thedas?

 

This isn't a case of asking a random stranger on the street. This would be two acquaintances, perhaps friends, talking privately.

 

What offensive question? The question that only you find offense to? If someone asks me about my politics, I answer them eagerly because I want to inform them. I don't take offense to that. They want to be informed. I inform them, unless I don't have the time, in which case I give a short answer and ask if we can discuss it another time.

 

I think people should care enough to find the answers themselves. Or if that truly is too much trouble, to actually think about what they say if they are asking about a very private subject like that.

 

Okay. So they should find the answers at their local church, yes? And how do they know if its offensive if they know nothing about it? When is it the advocate's turn to be understanding of the people who know nothing about this new and rare subject?

 

Being homosexual is not something that can be harmful to others like smoking (which is a habit, not a core feature of a person). And comparing it to adultery is just insulting. You should do some thinking, if you honestly believe that the comparison between homosexual people in general (including many loving and faithful couples) to cheating on a spouse holds any water.

 

It's funny that religious people cling to the "sexuality is a choice" argument, since religion is a choice that can easily be altered, and no one has ever given any proof that sexuality can be changed.

 

Smoking is not a core feature? Well neither is sexuality, or so we've been told to believe. Also, smoking is actually tied to a physical compulsion, so it can in fact be a core feature of a person. I work with a guy who "has to" take a smoke break ever hour or so. His behavior is very public and I assure you it is a feature that has come to define him.

 

You misunderstand the point. It wasn't a comparison. It was an illustration of a person who overlooks a perceived flaw in a friend in order to maintain the friendship. Why would a homosexual end a friendship with a person who disagrees with homosexuality but still accepts that homosexual as a friend? That would be petty.

 

Is religion easily altered? And is it really a choice in most cases? I suppose it becomes one later in life, but most religious people are religious because they were raised to be so. Just as kids nowadays are taught to believe that sexuality is inborn. Proof that sexuality is changeable exists, but that is neither here nor there. The discussion is about Dragon Age, which is a separate universe from ours. So the same reality may or may not apply.

 

I think we should bring it back to the original issue. Dorian and how the Inquisitor is allowed to respond to him. BioWare should allow options to disagree or disapprove of a character's behavior, opinion, actions, or even core being (such as being a Fade spirit for example) and yet still accept those characters as friends.

 

And that person has the right to decline answering you. Just like a trans person has zero reason to tell you about their genitals.

 

No one here wrote the person couldn't decline. Never wrote they had an obligation to even be polite either. Just pointing out rude is rude when Iron Bull answers rudely.

[In Exile]

No one is saying there is an obligation. I agree that no one should be required to educate someone on issues they don't understand. But you also have to realize that if people ask questions, whether they are respectful or poorly worded, if their questions are met with rudeness or criticism, that's not helping anyone. No one is required to be a walking educational pamphlet, but being polite, even if firmly telling the questioner to mind their own business, goes a lot farther than completely shutting someone out.

 

I disagree, vehemently.You say "that's not helping anyone". But what you're really getting at is precisely the point that I am objecting to: the idea that somehow someone is entitled to start judging a group based on whatever interaction they have with a random member of that group, and that it's somehow incumbent on each member of that group to maintain an image.

 

People ask stupid questions all the time. Getting told off should have absolutely no connection with anything other than one's personal relationship with the person who got told off. It comes back to things like racism or sexism. If they're going to start generalizing about groups of people, or start forming opinions of entire groups based off isolated interactions, that's again on them. 

 

I think people should be generally polite. I think people should always take the time to educate others. That's because I really, really, dislike rudeness. But that has nothing to do with a socially sensitive topic, or with sexuality, or with anything other than the basic manners we should all have as participants in society. 

 

The conversation went to real life examples a little while back. Even on the first page someone asked about surgery. I doubt sex reassignment surgery is something that happens in Thedas.

 

You can ask Krem about that, re: magic. So it's a concept that notionally exists, though clearly not via surgery. 

[In Exile]

I specifically said earlier that I don't think people have an obligation to educate others.  What I'm saying is that such sheltered ignorance is better met with polite correction (Or at least a polite refusal to answer) rather than aggressive condemnation.

 

No. Because as I said: implicit in this proposition is a moral judgment about how justifiable ignorance on the part of the majority. What I'm saying is that this type of ignorance is a failing on the part of the majority, and it's the majority who should take steps to cure themselves of their ignorance.

 

There's also the implication that people will form negative opinions about a group based on their interactions, which is just unjustifiable. Obviously people will do this - this is a basic human adaptive feature and a form of how we reason - but this doesn't mean we should actually condone that behaviour. 

 

As I said above - people should be polite because that's how we should all be in a functional and well-mannered society. But failing to be polite is a personal failing, and totally independent from the issue of the majority's ignorance. 

[Dai Grepher]

In Exile, the point you're missing is that if the person does not want to answer those questions, they can decline. That's no problem. Being rude about it is a detriment, and that's a fact of life.

 

However, Krem answered the questions politely. And notice how no one here is complaining about Krem's demeanor, but rather Iron Bull's?

[Krypplingz]

That's the one. I found it off-putting as well. Bull's tone is condescending. It could have easily been said in a way that was nonchalant. Going on to say I shoot fire out of my ass (rude, untrue) and that because of this I'm not qualified to use my mind to determine what fits the definition of "normal" and what doesn't, when in fact the question was what is true or false, is lecturing and condescending.

-snip-

I thought that comment was lighthearted and hilarious, breaking the tension that might have been created over the subject. The idea of mages having flamethrower butts is silly, so I just saw it as a joke. So maybe I'm just getting different vibes from Iron Bull. 

The only thing I thought was iffy was the freaky elf eyes, but it fits if you think about the DA2 elves and their massive pupils. 

[Heimdall]

No. Because as I said: implicit in this proposition is a moral judgment about how justifiable ignorance on the part of the majority. What I'm saying is that this type of ignorance is a failing on the part of the majority, and it's the majority who should take steps to cure themselves of their ignorance.

 

There's also the implication that people will form negative opinions about a group based on their interactions, which is just unjustifiable. Obviously people will do this - this is a basic human adaptive feature and a form of how we reason - but this doesn't mean we should actually condone that behaviour. 

 

As I said above - people should be polite because that's how we should all be in a functional and well-mannered society. But failing to be polite is a personal failing, and totally independent from the issue of the majority's ignorance. 

And I think this position is naive, it relies on the notion that the ignorant person is entirely aware of their ignorance and deficits.  That is generally the opposite of reality.  Ignorant individuals are generally are not aware of how ignorant their attitudes are.  It is difficult to look for something that one doesn't know they are missing.  That's just putting the blame on people who don't know things for not being exposed to those things previously, which may not be something they have had any control over.  I'm speaking of individuals here, not "the majority".  I'm specifically against the idea that the person asking should be condemned for their ignorance because it doesn't facilitate the respectful dialogue that  that would be most helpful in remedying that ignorance.

 

I agree about politeness as a function of a well-mannered society, I am simply saying that it is critical for proper dialogue on these issues.  One can't decry the "majority" for being ignorant and simultaneously stonewall and attack an honest attempt to learn for being poorly phrased.

[9TailsFox]

In Exile, the point you're missing is that if the person does not want to answer those questions, they can decline. That's no problem. Being rude about it is a detriment, and that's a fact of life.

 

However, Krem answered the questions politely. And notice how no one here is complaining about Krem's demeanor, but rather Iron Bull's?

Exactly, I understand why he lie to himself and Krem, he is bad qunari(his job literary liar) and Krem is his friend. Why attack Inquisitor who is friend to.

[Biotic Apostate]

Smoking is not a core feature? Well neither is sexuality, or so we've been told to believe. Also, smoking is actually tied to a physical compulsion, so it can in fact be a core feature of a person. I work with a guy who "has to" take a smoke break ever hour or so. His behavior is very public and I assure you it is a feature that has come to define him.

 

You misunderstand the point. It wasn't a comparison. It was an illustration of a person who overlooks a perceived flaw in a friend in order to maintain the friendship. Why would a homosexual end a friendship with a person who disagrees with homosexuality but still accepts that homosexual as a friend? That would be petty.

 

Is religion easily altered? And is it really a choice in most cases? I suppose it becomes one later in life, but most religious people are religious because they were raised to be so. Just as kids nowadays are taught to believe that sexuality is inborn. Proof that sexuality is changeable exists, but that is neither here nor there. The discussion is about Dragon Age, which is a separate universe from ours. So the same reality may or may not apply.

 

I think we should bring it back to the original issue. Dorian and how the Inquisitor is allowed to respond to him. BioWare should allow options to disagree or disapprove of a character's behavior, opinion, actions, or even core being (such as being a Fade spirit for example) and yet still accept those characters as friends.

No, smoking is a habit, or an addiction. It is not something that is an unchangeable part of a person.

 

Sexuality is a core feature. What you have been told is that sexuality doesn't dictate what a person is like, but it is a part of them.

 

You're still comparing outrage over adultery with outrage over homosexuality. And again, it's not petty, it's a reasonable response of any self-respecting gay person. Petty is thinking that homosexuality is somehow a negative trait that you can oh so kindly look past.

 

For any adult person, religion is a choice. They decide to worship a god that way and not another. And no, there is no proof.

 

And I've already said it, if an option like that is included, it should come with a penalty of loosing that companion.

[BSpud]

As a chronic, heavy, multiple-decade smoker who quit just half a year ago (cold turkey, w00t me), I'm horrified at the suggestion that smoking is "a core feature of a person."