7455 réponses à ce sujet

[Allison W]

danman2424 wrote...

Allison W wrote...


Except you're approaching it from the idea that the only value in life is reproduction, which is the ideology of the cancer cell, and when applied to the most advanced animals (humans, dolphins, advanced primates, among others) is but a filthy lie--sex has been practiced, non-reproductively, for social bonding and pleasure long before even humans came along. You're basically claiming that anything not oriented towards reproduction is "physiologically inappropriate," which has no merit whatsoever--people do things not oriented towards reproduction all the time. And if you're not arguing that everything not oriented towards reproduction is "inappropriate," why do you single out sex as practiced for social bonding and pleasure instead of reproduction, and not, say, video gaming in general, which is still commonly regarded as diametrically opposed to reproduction?

What's next? Are you going to say you're better than people who use birth control, because it's not "physiologically appropriate"? Or are you going to find a way to feed your ego that's remotely constructive?

Where did I once say that sex had to be in the interest of procreation? I said it is very clear which two go together. Human male and human woman. Birth control or cervical cancer wouldn't change that.

For procreation, yes--except you present it as superior not for procreation, but because you think it should be obvious that "this is how (straight people) do things." Do you regard those who don't share the same instinctive urges as inferior? Or superior? Because inequality necessitates one of the two. Or do you think that no one could possibly lack the instinctive urge to mate with the opposite biological sex via PIV intercourse, and only to mate with the opposite biological sex via PIV intercourse?

Modifié par Allison W, 28 février 2010 - 03:44 .

[MPSai]

I don't understand why a gay Shepard will be laughed at. Maybe you would laugh at it, but just because you would that doesn't make it a universal fact.

Modifié par MPSai, 28 février 2010 - 03:45 .

[Ryzaki]

Erode_The_Soul wrote...

danman2424 wrote...
Sorry to disappoint but yes, in the context of Mass Effect, a midget Shepard, gay Shepard, transvestite Shepard, etc. would be laughed at.

I know that's not exactly as politically correct as you would like, but that would be the case nonetheless.

I think the problem here is that you are taking your personal feelings and projecting them onto the Mass Effect audience as a whole. You're using your own personal opinion that those characters would be funny and assuming everyone who looks at those characters would think the same, then using that to then say "Well, everyone will think those characters are goofy, don't put them in." It doesn't work like that because not everyone who sees a gay Shepard is going to find it as hilarious as you.

THIS. Soooo much. The only way any of the three would be comical would be if BioWare INTENTIONALLY made them comical. Hell murder, rape, famine all of that can become comical if the author attempts to make it so. Of course the middle one is often said to be in bad taste when comical (unless of course you're reading manga. <_< )

[FataliTensei]

danman2424 wrote...

PyroFreak301 wrote...

danman2424 wrote...

PyroFreak301 wrote...

danman2424 wrote...
 I do not, however, agree with the growing idea that being a nice person means you should be able to *boink* whatever you like.

What about two nice people that both want to *boink* eachother?

Even if those 2 happen to be of the same sex, same bloodline, etc.?

Hmm now that is something I have always thought about, and once again, am not sure how I feel about it. I don't think I'd ever be able to get get over seeing such deviations as strange or funny.

You're too quick to group homosexuality and incest under the same banner. It doesn't take deep inspection to realise that the two are different in quite a few different aspects; they're different things and should be treated as such.

Why? What objection do you have to a consensual sexual encounter in which no one is being hurt?

Danman i remember you posting in another thread where someone already explained this to you, enough already stay on topic, this thread is to find a compromise/solution so that it can be included but those who don't want it can skip over it

stay on topic and quit derailing this thread with ideological off-topic bait arguments

[PyroFreak301]

danman2424 wrote...

PyroFreak301 wrote...

danman2424 wrote...

PyroFreak301 wrote...

danman2424 wrote...
 I do not, however, agree with the growing idea that being a nice person means you should be able to *boink* whatever you like.

What about two nice people that both want to *boink* eachother?

Even if those 2 happen to be of the same sex, same bloodline, etc.?

Hmm now that is something I have always thought about, and once again, am not sure how I feel about it. I don't think I'd ever be able to get get over seeing such deviations as strange or funny.

You're too quick to group homosexuality and incest under the same banner. It doesn't take deep inspection to realise that the two are different in quite a few different aspects; they're different things and should be treated as such.

Why? What objection do you have to a consensual sexual encounter in which no one is being hurt?

Because incest has the potential for harmful consequences, even if the individuals are not harmed. I'm purposely being as vague as possible here as to not derail the topic further, but I could list off a couple of reasons why incest is different. That being said, I've yet to hear one good reason why homosexuality is bad.

EDIT: I think it was you I discussed this exact same thing in another thread. So I'm stopping discussing it here,

Modifié par PyroFreak301, 28 février 2010 - 03:51 .

[MPSai]

Stop dignifying danman's comparisons, he's just doing it to provoke. Though I think it's funny he has no problem with the interspecies sex present in ME2, but GAY PEOPLE, nooo, that's just too far.

[FataliTensei]

PyroFreak301 wrote...

danman2424 wrote...

PyroFreak301 wrote...

danman2424 wrote...

PyroFreak301 wrote...

danman2424 wrote...
 I do not, however, agree with the growing idea that being a nice person means you should be able to *boink* whatever you like.

What about two nice people that both want to *boink* eachother?

Even if those 2 happen to be of the same sex, same bloodline, etc.?

Hmm now that is something I have always thought about, and once again, am not sure how I feel about it. I don't think I'd ever be able to get get over seeing such deviations as strange or funny.

You're too quick to group homosexuality and incest under the same banner. It doesn't take deep inspection to realise that the two are different in quite a few different aspects; they're different things and should be treated as such.

Why? What objection do you have to a consensual sexual encounter in which no one is being hurt?

Because incest has the potential for harmful consequences, even if the individuals are not harmed. I'm purposely being as vague as possible here as to not derail the topic further, but I could list off a couple of reasons why incest is different. That being said, I've yet to hear one good reason why homosexuality is bad.

EDIT: I think it was you I discussed this exact same thing in another thread. So I'm stopping discussing it here,

It was him, it was in the "compromise" thread, i remember mainly because he still had the same avatar picture

[Erode_The_Soul]

danman2424 wrote...
Look me in the eyes and tell me you wouldn't find midget Shepard to be comical. 

*looks at eyes*
I honestly don't think I would, provided Bioware would take the necessary steps to alter cutscenes and interactions so they don't appear awkward. However, if I were presented with an optional midget Shepard and found it uncomfortable, for whatever reason, to play that character, I would simplyavoid it and play the non-midget Shep.

[TheGondola]

Thing is, it isn't a problem with Shepard not being a fruit, he is the player character and he can be any sort of person. The problem is that they would need to create a new character that was bi or gay, because for straight people, it would ruin the image of that character. If they made someone like Mordin gay (oh god i've given them ideas) it would ruin that character for people not attracted to, well mordin. There other problems with the npc in question flirting with the pc, that would make straight players uncomfortable or even laugh.



That said I'm all for same-sex romances in ME3, provided they make it more than one character in case I don't like one of them.

[sw33ts]

TheGondola wrote...

Thing is, it isn't a problem with Shepard not being a fruit, he is the player character and he can be any sort of person. The problem is that they would need to create a new character that was bi or gay, because for straight people, it would ruin the image of that character. If they made someone like Mordin gay (oh god i've given them ideas) it would ruin that character for people not attracted to, well mordin. There other problems with the npc in question flirting with the pc, that would make straight players uncomfortable or even laugh.

That said I'm all for same-sex romances in ME3, provided they make it more than one character in case I don't like one of them.

...this is why we suggested colored font or even a "crush" screen at the beginning of the game that basically is if you choose a crush of the same sex then they'll hit on you...otherwise you are left alone.  Othewise if it's a DLC then you don't have to worry about it if you don't download.

Please people.  Read ALL three posts.

[FataliTensei]

TheGondola wrote...

That said I'm all for same-sex romances in ME3, provided they make it more than one character in case I don't like one of them.

I don't think we're gonna get that lucky

[danman2424]

Allison W wrote...

danman2424 wrote...

Allison W wrote...


Except you're approaching it from the idea that the only value in life is reproduction, which is the ideology of the cancer cell, and when applied to the most advanced animals (humans, dolphins, advanced primates, among others) is but a filthy lie--sex has been practiced, non-reproductively, for social bonding and pleasure long before even humans came along. You're basically claiming that anything not oriented towards reproduction is "physiologically inappropriate," which has no merit whatsoever--people do things not oriented towards reproduction all the time. And if you're not arguing that everything not oriented towards reproduction is "inappropriate," why do you single out sex as practiced for social bonding and pleasure instead of reproduction, and not, say, video gaming in general, which is still commonly regarded as diametrically opposed to reproduction?

What's next? Are you going to say you're better than people who use birth control, because it's not "physiologically appropriate"? Or are you going to find a way to feed your ego that's remotely constructive?

Where did I once say that sex had to be in the interest of procreation? I said it is very clear which two go together. Human male and human woman. Birth control or cervical cancer wouldn't change that.

For procreation, yes--except you present it as superior not for procreation, but because you think it should be obvious that "this is how (straight people) do things." Do you regard those who don't share the same instinctive urges as inferior? Or superior? Because inequality necessitates one of the two. Or do you think that no one could possibly lack the instinctive urge to mate with the opposite biological sex via PIV intercourse, and only to mate with the opposite biological sex via PIV intercourse?

Once again, I'm not sure how to regard those that lack "the instinctive urges" as you call them, or deviate from man on woman. I certainly don't hate them, but i'm not sure at all about whether they should be allowed to act on these desires just because they have them. Many people have all kinds of strange desires that they don't act on.

[Teryx]

danman2424 wrote...

Where did I once say that sex had to be in the interest of procreation? I said it is very clear which two go together. Human male and human woman. Birth control or cervical cancer wouldn't change that.

Homosexuality exists; there is no debating this fact.  It exists in humans, it exists in almost every other species of mammal, and in a whole bunch of other biological classes, and scientists have found evidence supporting the fact that homosexuality serves a useful evolutionary purpose in a population.

Penis plus vagina may go together for the purposes of procreation, but let's not pretend that that fact implies it is the only form of sex that should exist.  Sexuality, especially human sexuality, is by no means a narrow field.

And I would like to point out that a good deal of gay men don't practice "penis in anus" sex, and a good deal of heterosexual couples do.

Regardless, this is outside of the scope of this discussion.  We are not discussing whether homosexuality is natural or not, or right or wrong, or what sets of genitalia match up.  I think it's fair to say that you won't be changing your stance on whether or not a gay male/male romance option should exist in the Mass Effect games, just as you should realize that your opinion should not negate nor trump anyone else's.

We understand your position, danman; you've made it abundantly clear.  The purpose of this thread (as I understand it), is to attempt to express the desire for further romance options in these games, and to explain the reasoning behind those desires.  I would like to gently point out that if that is not the reason you are posting in this thread, and you have no intention of allowing your opinion to sway, I'd encourage you to take yourself out of the discussion, and perhaps start up a thread of your own discussing why you believe the options that exist currently are sufficient.

[TheGondola]

sw33ts wrote...

TheGondola wrote...

Thing is, it isn't a problem with Shepard not being a fruit, he is the player character and he can be any sort of person. The problem is that they would need to create a new character that was bi or gay, because for straight people, it would ruin the image of that character. If they made someone like Mordin gay (oh god i've given them ideas) it would ruin that character for people not attracted to, well mordin. There other problems with the npc in question flirting with the pc, that would make straight players uncomfortable or even laugh.

That said I'm all for same-sex romances in ME3, provided they make it more than one character in case I don't like one of them.

...this is why we suggested colored font or even a "crush" screen at the beginning of the game that basically is if you choose a crush of the same sex then they'll hit on you...otherwise you are left alone.  Othewise if it's a DLC then you don't have to worry about it if you don't download.

Please people.  Read ALL three posts.

Like the colored font idea, however I would not want dlc. For me all dlc just feels tacked on, I would prefer it to be shipped with the game and to be developed with all the other romances.

[danman2424]

FataliTensei wrote...


Danman i remember you posting in another thread where someone already explained this to you

All I want you to do is please repeat that explanation because I must have missed it.

[sw33ts]

Yes people if you have a DESIRE to respond to danman. Do not ACT upon your desire.

Not back on topic, are most people in favor of new people or DLCs to turn existing former bisexuals into bisexuals?

Modifié par sw33ts, 28 février 2010 - 04:04 .

[Arik7]

I think we should all thank danman2424 for bumping our thread from the start, however his off-topic moral arguments are better left ignored.

[sw33ts]

TheGondola wrote...

sw33ts wrote...

TheGondola wrote...

Thing is, it isn't a problem with Shepard not being a fruit, he is the player character and he can be any sort of person. The problem is that they would need to create a new character that was bi or gay, because for straight people, it would ruin the image of that character. If they made someone like Mordin gay (oh god i've given them ideas) it would ruin that character for people not attracted to, well mordin. There other problems with the npc in question flirting with the pc, that would make straight players uncomfortable or even laugh.

That said I'm all for same-sex romances in ME3, provided they make it more than one character in case I don't like one of them.

...this is why we suggested colored font or even a "crush" screen at the beginning of the game that basically is if you choose a crush of the same sex then they'll hit on you...otherwise you are left alone.  Othewise if it's a DLC then you don't have to worry about it if you don't download.

Please people.  Read ALL three posts.

Like the colored font idea, however I would not want dlc. For me all dlc just feels tacked on, I would prefer it to be shipped with the game and to be developed with all the other romances.

Elaborate?  Do you mean you want them to reship out ME1-ME3 or are you wanting them to come out with ME3 with it now open?

[TheGondola]

FataliTensei wrote...

TheGondola wrote...

That said I'm all for same-sex romances in ME3, provided they make it more than one character in case I don't like one of them.

I don't think we're gonna get that lucky

Heh. Oh well I'm bi so I can cope

[sw33ts]

TheGondola wrote...

FataliTensei wrote...

TheGondola wrote...

That said I'm all for same-sex romances in ME3, provided they make it more than one character in case I don't like one of them.

I don't think we're gonna get that lucky

Heh. Oh well I'm bi so I can cope

Pssh coping.  I'm in the same boat but I'm female and those male LIs did nothing for me.  So i stayed loyal to Liara.

Modifié par sw33ts, 28 février 2010 - 04:03 .

[MPSai]

danman2424 wrote...

Once again, I'm not sure how to regard those that lack "the instinctive urges" as you call them, or deviate from man on woman. I certainly don't hate them, but i'm not sure at all about whether they should be allowed to act on these desires just because they have them.

So you... don't HATE gay people... you just want to control their lives and keep them out of media? You know, just because you personally feel this way it doesn't mean same-sex romances in ME would be inherently "inappropriate", you realize this don't you?

[Allison W]

danman2424 wrote...

Allison W wrote...

danman2424 wrote...

Allison W wrote...


Except you're approaching it from the idea that the only value in life is reproduction, which is the ideology of the cancer cell, and when applied to the most advanced animals (humans, dolphins, advanced primates, among others) is but a filthy lie--sex has been practiced, non-reproductively, for social bonding and pleasure long before even humans came along. You're basically claiming that anything not oriented towards reproduction is "physiologically inappropriate," which has no merit whatsoever--people do things not oriented towards reproduction all the time. And if you're not arguing that everything not oriented towards reproduction is "inappropriate," why do you single out sex as practiced for social bonding and pleasure instead of reproduction, and not, say, video gaming in general, which is still commonly regarded as diametrically opposed to reproduction?

What's next? Are you going to say you're better than people who use birth control, because it's not "physiologically appropriate"? Or are you going to find a way to feed your ego that's remotely constructive?

Where did I once say that sex had to be in the interest of procreation? I said it is very clear which two go together. Human male and human woman. Birth control or cervical cancer wouldn't change that.

For procreation, yes--except you present it as superior not for procreation, but because you think it should be obvious that "this is how (straight people) do things." Do you regard those who don't share the same instinctive urges as inferior? Or superior? Because inequality necessitates one of the two. Or do you think that no one could possibly lack the instinctive urge to mate with the opposite biological sex via PIV intercourse, and only to mate with the opposite biological sex via PIV intercourse?

Once again, I'm not sure how to regard those that lack "the instinctive urges" as you call them, or deviate from man on woman. I certainly don't hate them, but i'm not sure at all about whether they should be allowed to act on these desires just because they have them. Many people have all kinds of strange desires that they don't act on.

I don't know. Why should people interested in man-on-woman PIV be allowed to act on those urges just because they have them, when reproduction could be done with turkey basters?

[TheGondola]

sw33ts wrote...

TheGondola wrote...

sw33ts wrote...

TheGondola wrote...

Thing is, it isn't a problem with Shepard not being a fruit, he is the player character and he can be any sort of person. The problem is that they would need to create a new character that was bi or gay, because for straight people, it would ruin the image of that character. If they made someone like Mordin gay (oh god i've given them ideas) it would ruin that character for people not attracted to, well mordin. There other problems with the npc in question flirting with the pc, that would make straight players uncomfortable or even laugh.

That said I'm all for same-sex romances in ME3, provided they make it more than one character in case I don't like one of them.

...this is why we suggested colored font or even a "crush" screen at the beginning of the game that basically is if you choose a crush of the same sex then they'll hit on you...otherwise you are left alone.  Othewise if it's a DLC then you don't have to worry about it if you don't download.

Please people.  Read ALL three posts.

Like the colored font idea, however I would not want dlc. For me all dlc just feels tacked on, I would prefer it to be shipped with the game and to be developed with all the other romances.

Elaborate?  Do you mean you want them to reship out ME1-ME3 or are you wanting them to come out with ME3 with it now open?

Reship, god no. That's insane. I simply want them to develop a same-sex romance for ME3 alongside all the others and not a dlc.

Modifié par TheGondola, 28 février 2010 - 04:04 .

[PyroFreak301]

TheGondola wrote...

Thing is, it isn't a problem with Shepard not being a fruit, he is the player character and he can be any sort of person. The problem is that they would need to create a new character that was bi or gay, because for straight people, it would ruin the image of that character. If they made someone like Mordin gay (oh god i've given them ideas) it would ruin that character for people not attracted to, well mordin. There other problems with the npc in question flirting with the pc, that would make straight players uncomfortable or even laugh.

That said I'm all for same-sex romances in ME3, provided they make it more than one character in case I don't like one of them.

A couple of characters were already written with romance in mind, so it wouldn't really be a change in personality to simply unlock the romances for them, if you've played FShep and spoken to Tali, it seems to go down the romance path anyway but just abrubtly stops with no explaination if you're not playing the right gender.

I didn't think of Liara as any different when I found I could romance her with my FShep in ME1, even though I wasn't expecting it, I dont see how it would change the character of these existing characters.

Most of us here will also agree that some flirting in game was just done horribly by Bioware, FShep and Jacob being a glaring example of how it shouldn't be forced upon you. If it's completely reliant on the player starting the conversation with a colour coded option, everyone wins.

[danman2424]

[quote]PyroFreak301 wrote...
[/quote]
Because incest has the potential for harmful consequences,

[/quote]And if the male has had a vasectomy? The female has had her tubes tied? What objection then? No objection? What if they simply don't want to have children? What if the relationship is between a brother and a brother, sister and sister, mother and daughter, father or son? No objections? I take it you'd say "sure, let them be happy"?