450 réponses à ce sujet

[AlanC9]

I always figured that to be more of a slavery discussion since he wasn't given a choice in the matter. The Crows bought him as a child and were training him to become an assassin.

It was an uncomfortable topic because teaching children to have sex with men and women shouldn't ever be a comfortable topic, but that might be part of the point.

Come to think of it, The Americans went there in a training montage, although Philip wasn't a child anymore. Still uncomfortable.

[KamuiStorm]

Perhaps a witcher 3 like triss/yen triple play?

[dreamgazer]

Perhaps a witcher 3 like triss/yen triple play?

This would please me greatly.

Spoiler

Haha! Take that, romance power-trippers! No ass for you at all!

[DreamerM]

Back on the original topic, I think we can only benefit from including different types of relationships. Some people are happily polyamourous. Some people are strict "one person only" people. I think the best way to handle it would be as a natural extension of a character's personality: are they happy to share or do they want to be your one and only? It should depend on the person, and the option to bring it up in conversation with them should exist.

[The One True Nobody]

Yeah it seems like a lot of effort to get it in from the writers and VAs since it requires multiple LIs.

 

Unless you do it like Bethesda in Fallout 4, but I suspect that was more just them being lazy because there is absolutely no dialogue about romancing multiple people. It simply just doesn't stop you from doing it.

 

BioWare's style is too different from Bethesda for it to work.

[Fredward]

Do you mean they don't have feelings towards your other partners? Then it's absolutely normal and is still considered a polyamory as long as they know of each other.

 

Nah, mean more along the lines of they don't seem to know there are other parties involved with their lover. Theirs no recognition in that regard at all, like Battlebloodmage said. It's like with Skyrim when it got plaudits for allowing gay marriage but what it was really doing was just not checking your PCs gender. I suppose it's a win/win when you get to do less work than you would've for strictly hetero options and still get the liberal crowd but I can't help but side eye the idea a bit.

 

It's less of Bethesda allowing/endorsing polyamory and more of polyamory being a happy side-effect of their vague suggestion of a romance system.

[BloodyMares]

But polyamory and promiscuity is often associated to them, so it's not entirely off-topic.

It is. Doesn't matter what it's associated with. The only thing in common is a social stigma against it. Should we talk about transgendered people as well? Or perhaps naturism and exhibitionism? This thread is specifically about having multiple romantic relationships so if you want to discuss homosexuality do this in context of polyamory (homosexual people in poly relationship). If you want to discuss only homosexuality then go to a  "Gaylien romance?" thread that is specifically created to discuss homosexuality. Or Dragon Age forums, as you mainly talk about Dragon Age.

Don't take it wrong, I hate to be "that guy" but I don't want to see a "This thread has run it's course" message from Bioware Mods.

[BloodyMares]

Nah, mean more along the lines of they don't seem to know there are other parties involved with their lover. Theirs no recognition in that regard at all, like Battlebloodmage said. It's like with Skyrim when it got plaudits for allowing gay marriage but what it was really doing was just not checking your PCs gender. I suppose it's a win/win when you get to do less work than you would've for strictly hetero options and still get the liberal crowd but I can't help but side eye the idea a bit.

 

It's less of Bethesda allowing/endorsing polyamory and more of polyamory being a happy side-effect of their vague suggestion of a romance system.

Then I agree, it has nothing to do with polyamory. In GTA San Andreas/IV you can have multiple girlfriends that don't know about one another as well. It's simply cheating on them all. 

[Jedi Comedian]

It is. Doesn't matter what it's associated with. The only thing in common is a social stigma against it. Should we talk about transgendered people as well? Or perhaps naturism and exhibitionism? This thread is specifically about having multiple romantic relationships so if you want to discuss homosexuality do this in context of polyamory (homosexual people in poly relationship). If you want to discuss only homosexuality then go to a "Gaylien romance?" thread that is specifically created to discuss homosexuality. Or Dragon Age forums, as you mainly talk about Dragon Age.

Don't take it wrong, I hate to be "that guy" but I don't want to see a "This thread has run it's course" message from Bioware Mods.

I agree. The discussion was way too long anyway.

[Toasted Llama]

Instead of giving representation, DA developers should give options people actually want. 

 

Be careful what you wish for! There IS a certain level of demand for polyamory

[Battlebloodmage]

Be careful what you wish for! There IS a certain level of demand for polyamory

I see mostly apathetic like whatever. I also see quite a lot of people oppose to it. 

[AlanC9]

Then I agree, it has nothing to do with polyamory. In GTA San Andreas/IV you can have multiple girlfriends that don't know about one another as well. It's simply cheating on them all.

I don't think that's got anything to do with "polyamory." That's just plain cheating.

[Seraphim24]

Most people view "poly" a some kind of being like a "******" sort of, you aren't committing to these people etc etc. It has a pretty low status for most people.

 

It's really ironic though, given how many people are willing to engage with people outside their primary partner, but make these arbitrary demands like that person who they are now seeing on the side should be totally devoted to them, even though they are you, know, currently in the process of dividing their devotion. Some of those people go by the identifier "poly" too by the way. I've seen people that don't identify as "poly" that are more tolerant of "poly."

 

Honestly there isn't a single area of life where you can more easily find hypocrisy than in the realm of sexuality.... most people's "identification" when you really get past the labels is very simple to understands, it's

 

MEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEMMEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEMMEME

[Seraphim24]

Back on the original topic, I think we can only benefit from including different types of relationships. Some people are happily polyamourous. Some people are strict "one person only" people. I think the best way to handle it would be as a natural extension of a character's personality: are they happy to share or do they want to be your one and only? It should depend on the person, and the option to bring it up in conversation with them should exist.

 

Well I already stated the only realistic representation would be something in between those two points, like a lot of people.

[Battlebloodmage]

Most people view "poly" a some kind of being like a "******" sort of, you aren't committing to these people etc etc. It has a pretty low status for most people.

 

It's really ironic though, given how many people are willing to engage with people outside their primary partner, but make these arbitrary demands like that person who they are now seeing on the side should be totally devoted to them, even though they are you, know, currently in the process of dividing their devotion. Some of those people go by the identifier "poly" too by the way. I've seen people that don't identify as "poly" that are more tolerant of "poly."

 

Honestly there isn't a single area of life where you can more easily find hypocrisy than in the realm of sexuality.... most people's "identification" when you really get past the labels is very simple to understands, it's

 

MEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEMMEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEMMEME

A lot of people want harem, not poly. I saw guys said that they support polygyny but not polyandry. They like for themselves to have multiple wives but not woman has multiple husbands. Reading manga, you often see +1 to the harem and stuffs like that constantly. It's getting obnoxious.

[Laughing_Man]

A lot of people want harem, not poly. I saw guys said that they support polygyny but not polyandry. They like for themselves to have multiple wives but not woman has multiple husbands.

 

It's still polyamory as I understand the term, and assuming that the relationship is between everyone in the group not just certain partners with certain partners, than everyone will still follow their sexual preferences, i.e. a straight male would not want to see another male in the relationship. (unless the relationship is limited only to certain pairings within the group)

 

Personally I think that the term "Poly" is useless.

 

Bottom line it comes down to trust and jealousy, they either exist or not. They might exist with certain partners and be absent with others.

Sometimes it might depend on the gender of the participants. One partner may have more objections than another, etc.

 

It's a fluid situation that is defined specifically by and for the people involved in it. Trying to create a universal system with rules and accepted definitions is laughable and also somewhat ironic considering the fact that usually polyamory is supposed to defy conventions and common perception of what is acceptable.

[Battlebloodmage]

It's still polyamory as I understand the term, and assuming that the relationship is between everyone in the group not just certain partners with certain partners, than everyone will still follow their sexual preferences, i.e. a straight male would not want to see another male in the relationship. (unless the relationship is limited only to certain pairings within the group)

 

Personally I think that the term "Poly" is useless.

 

Bottom line it comes down to trust and jealousy, they either exist or not. They might exist with certain partners and be absent with others.

Sometimes it might depend on the gender of the participants. One partner may have more objections than another, etc.

It's a fluid situation that is defined personally by the people involved in it, trying to create a universal system with rules and accepted definitions is laughable and also somewhat ironic considering the fact that usually polyamory is supposed to defy conventions and common perception of what is acceptable.

It was a discussion on legalization of polygamy. They specifically talk about wanting polygyny to be legal but not polyandry, I even question them about it. It's about what they like instead of freedom to love for everyone. Of course having polyandry wouldn't mean they have to engage in it. 

 

I actually know some couples where the husband is straight and the wife has a boyfriend on the side. The husband doesn't have a mistress or anything. There is no definitive answer for everything. 

[Seraphim24]

It's still polyamory as I understand the term, and assuming that the relationship is between everyone in the group not just certain partners with certain partners, than everyone will still follow their sexual preferences, i.e. a straight male would not want to see another male in the relationship. (unless the relationship is limited only to certain pairings within the group)

 

Personally I think that the term "Poly" is useless.

 

Bottom line it comes down to trust and jealousy, they either exist or not. They might exist with certain partners and be absent with others.

Sometimes it might depend on the gender of the participants. One partner may have more objections than another, etc.

 

It's a fluid situation that is defined specifically by and for the people involved in it. Trying to create a universal system with rules and accepted definitions is laughable and also somewhat ironic considering the fact that usually polyamory is supposed to defy conventions and common perception of what is acceptable.

 

Well whatever you call it that's what you are more likely to see, not "Oh I don't mind so and so sees so and so for such and such."

[Seraphim24]

Really, people waste so much time on labels "religion, sexuality, gender, orientation" and they never actually mean a thing.

[Thibax]

We can talk about polyamory on my bed =)

[Jedi Comedian]

Really, people waste so much time on labels "religion, sexuality, gender, orientation" and they never actually mean a thing.

I for one hate labels, only use them for utilitarian reasons.

[Laughing_Man]

I actually know some couples where the husband is straight and the wife has a boyfriend on the side. The husband doesn't have a mistress or anything.

 

Good for them. I do wonder if such arrangements tend to hold for more than a short period.

 

 

Well whatever you call it that's what you are more likely to see, not "Oh I don't mind so and so sees so and so for such and such."

 

What?

 

Really, people waste so much time on labels "religion, sexuality, gender, orientation" and they never actually mean a thing.

 

Religion would be meaningless without labels. But yes, I never cared too much about labels, or understood why people feel the incessant need to categorize and name every sexual quirk on earth separately.

[AlanC9]

Really, people waste so much time on labels "religion, sexuality, gender, orientation" and they never actually mean a thing.

It's not just these labels. Taxonomy in general is often a waste of time.

[Seraphim24]

It's not just these labels. Taxonomy in general is often a waste of time.

 

I think that's what I was implying, more or less.

 

People don't act on labels they act on what a person or thing or game or whatever is, more or less, so what something is internally is the only metric you should be using.

 

Well, all living things even.

[Battlebloodmage]

Labels are unnecessary, because instead of asking "are you attracted to only men" or "are you attracted to both men and women"? We could just say gay or bi. It seems like a shortcut for some people like dating profile or things like that. Some jobs also may be gender specific like acting where the role required female or male, and things like that. It's broad terminology to make it easier for people know what you're looking for or what you're looking for in others. It's only get ridiculous when people start to make sub-categories for every single little tumblr terms that it starts to become a snowflake syndrome.