No need to be rude, dear MedullaOblongata. There are no trolls as long as you do not consider yourself trolled.
I just don't understand whether adding a gay romance to BG was meant to enhance it. No really. I don't understand.
I was especially upset to learn that Dorn, that iron-clad Manowar-like warrior, was gay. Can I be upset without being regarded as a homophobe? I don't know, but I do.
For someone who wants GLBT people out of his view, you certainly do seek out our company much more than we'd expect. You've used the words 'they' and 'them' a lot in this post. Would you care to address any GLBT people here as actual humans?
"Man, I ain't got no quarrel with them gays". Homophobia is a luxury for people without real enemies or real problems...
You know, I've got no problem with LGBT as long as they are enjoying each other somewhere out of my view.
It is only when they step out, when they scream how "proud they are", when they occupy show business, when they shoot TV-shows shown during daytime on MTV, when they start involving minors in their doings, when they occupy my favourite games - I do start having problems with them. And not only me. The majority of normal people as well.
And that's because their attitude towards heterosexuals and heterosexual life is shocking for me. But who am I to complain?
I respect you fine. You just clearly don't understand what I was saying. If you did you wouldn't keep saying things like I am insinuating or saying that you have no respect for gay people. I used being gay as an EXAMPLE to illustrate my point. Nothing more.
I have't said you don't like or respect gay people. It's you who feels the need to declare "I have no problem with the gays!"
I could have used many other things as my example, as I said. It could have been a Dungeons and Dragons fan I was talking about, or a Jersey Shore Fan. Or someone who hates television. And so on.
The example is not the point, and you are taking it like it is.
And no offense, that's your damage not mine.
Sorry again if I have offended you. It certainly wasn't my intention. I have just been trying unsuccesfully to explain myself adequately. I failed obviously.
As I have said repeatedly now, I was merely trying to point out that making assumptions about people you don't know is rude and bad. And you ought to avoid doing it. Thats it. There was nothing else to my arguement/point.
I am getting tired of you (and some others) putting words in my mouth.
I never said he was wrong. I said he has clearly missed the point of what I was saying, given his reactions to it. Much like you miss the point, of oh so many things.
You know, I've got no problem with LGBT as long as they are enjoying each other somewhere out of my view.
It is only when they step out, when they scream how "proud they are", when they occupy show business, when they shoot TV-shows shown during daytime on MTV, when they start involving minors in their doings, when they occupy my favourite games - I do start having problems with them. And not only me. The majority of normal people as well.
And that's because their attitude towards heterosexuals and heterosexual life is shocking for me. But who am I to complain?
This quote right here shows you are not at all tolerant of LGBT people contrary to your claims otherwise.
In that very quote you say several offensive and bigotted things.
1) You said gay people can be gay as long as it isn't anywhere near you. With the implication that there will be consequences if they are gay near you. 2) You said gays shouldn't be seen in case they corrupt The Children. With the implication that we wil spread our gayness to them and that would be wrong. Cos theres something wrong with being gay. 3) You strongly imply Gay=Pedophile. Again. 4) You out right say gay people are abnormal. Like there is something wrong with us.
And yet you have the audacity to claim "I'm not a bigot though!"
If you want to learn about why GLBT people enjoyed the addition of Dorn, you can go read the previous comments in the thread where this was discussed. You are welcome to whatever feelings you have about the subject.
No need to be rude, dear MedullaOblongata. There are no trolls as long as you do not consider yourself trolled.
I just don't understand whether adding a gay romance to BG was meant to enhance it. No really. I don't understand.
I was especially upset to learn that Dorn, that iron-clad Manowar-like warrior, was gay. Can I be upset without being regarded as a homophobe? I don't know, but I do.
So, there are IRL gays in this thread, much as I suspected. Ouch. At least it justifies your views on the game a bit.
I could discuss the harm for heterosexuals arising from homosexuality elsewhere, but not on this thread. Preferably better out of BG forums.
And yes, to conclude my rant, it's just a pity they have introduced gay romance to BG without any need. I reckon I am entitled to my own opinion, but I also believe I am not alone. You are free to consider me a gay-hater if you will, though. It's much easier, than to try to understand a different point of view.
I love Baldur's Gate, but I find it sad that others get access to content that I won't be able to fully enjoy because they are part of the eponymous "majority" and I am not.
Why should I be excluded from the full enjoyment of the game just because I don't form part of the argueable "majority"?
It's not like adding a small bit of content for me and people like me, takes away anything from you and people like you. It doesn't remove from the game. It adds to it so that more people can get the same experience as you.
And that is un-needful and wrong is it?
I am sorry but that is -at best- a selfish attitude to have. And at worst it is outright bigotry.
So, there are IRL gays in this thread, much as I suspected. Ouch. At least it justifies your views on the game a bit.
I could discuss the harm for heterosexuals arising from homosexuality elsewhere, but not on this thread. Preferably better out of BG forums.
And yes, to conclude my rant, it's just a pity they have introduced gay romance to BG without any need. I reckon I am entitled to my own opinion, but I also believe I am not alone. You are free to consider me a gay-hater if you will, though. It's much easier, than to try to understand a different point of view.
You remain welcome to read the previous posts on this subject, as I mentioned. We have read different posts from people with your point of view many times and feel that we have a pretty good understanding of your feelings and thoughts on the subject.
So, there are IRL gays in this thread, much as I suspected. Ouch. At least it justifies your views on the game a bit.
I could discuss the harm for heterosexuals arising from homosexuality elsewhere, but not on this thread. Preferably better out of BG forums.
And yes, to conclude my rant, it's just a pity they have introduced gay romance to BG without any need. I reckon I am entitled to my own opinion, but I also believe I am not alone. You are free to consider me a gay-hater if you will, though. It's much easier, than to try to understand a different point of view.
Then again, most of the people who play BG these days, from what it seems, would've been brought up without the idea Homosexuality does nothing to them. Or whatever. But still, it is no excuse to cause a thread that's started to inform people has turned into a war ground for Heterosexuality V.S. Homosexuality. Can't people just enjoy the game, even if the characters get specified sexuality dialogue?
I can't see how it directly affects anyone in a negative way. Just because your party member might be of a certain sexuality doesn't mean you'll then turn into that character or it's sexual orientation. The game isn't forcing you to play those characters. You can remove them from the party. It seems everyone's arguments against it are purely; There is homosexuality in the game.
However I don't understand what the problem is. I'd love to understand everyone's argument but they just seem biased and there's no real cause or grounds for that side of the argument.
@Kitteh_On_A_Cloud I haven't followed your entire discussion with fitscotgaymer. But I think you need to know why there are Pride parades. They have been very necessary, and still are. Society is not a tolerant place, and one of society's ways of fighting gay rights is, you guessed it: silence. Therefore, an important way of standing up for ones rights is to get dressed up and go on a parade. If heterosexuals had been discriminated against there would, no doubt in my mind, be straight-parades. But as we all know, straight people as a group haven't been persecuted.
Let's compare it to rights for african americans. Rosa Parks fought for her beliefs by not giving up her bus seat to a white man. Lots of people back then thought that she was annoying and "in their face". Yet, what she did was pretty much exactly what gay people do when they parade and don't hide their lifestyles.
I agree with you that it's unfortunate that some subjects are very touchy "hot". However, the fault doesn't lie with those who are touchy. The reason people become touchy is because they have a background of not being tolerated (compare to racism as above)! Having tradition and religion (and in many countries law) teamed up against you it's actually quite natural. In short: "touchy-ness" is simply the product of society's very real discrimination.
Then again, most of the people who play BG these days, from what it seems, would've been brought up without the idea Homosexuality does nothing to them. Or whatever. But still, it is no excuse to cause a thread that's started to inform people has turned into a war ground for Heterosexuality V.S. Homosexuality. Can't people just enjoy the game, even if the characters get specified sexuality dialogue?
I can't see how it directly affects anyone in a negative way. Just because your party member might be of a certain sexuality doesn't mean you'll then turn into that character or it's sexual orientation. The game isn't forcing you to play those characters. You can remove them from the party. It seems everyone's arguments against it are purely; There is homosexuality in the game.
However I don't understand what the problem is. I'd love to understand everyone's argument but they just seem biased and there's no real cause or grounds for that side of the argument.
So... turns out that I was spot on, when I predicted that Dorn was gonna be the bisexual one, out of the three new characters. And... turns out that his "do not annoy me with such simplistic notions of morality" COULD indeed be referring both to his blackguard status and his bisexual status.
I don't know where everybody took the idea that homosexuality and bisexuality were widespread and commonly accepted in Baldur's Gate like in Dragon Age. We needed to trouble Ed Greenwood to realize that yes, it does happen, no, it's in no way common, and yes, there is prejudice. All of which was quite predictable.
@fitscotgaymer: Because sometimes saying 'I have no problems with gays!' over and over again just saves you the trouble of getting into a flamewar and being wrongly stigmatised as a homophobe and seen as the worst scum on earth. Because, yes,political correctness. I decided to not give in to just nodding my head meekly like a sheep and therefore pointed out that I sometimes DO have problems with gay people, as in the Gay parades and the ones forcing their sexual orientation on you by overly obsessing over it. Defending yourself for the gazillionth time gets tiring after a while. No doubt it's the same for gay people, but this is something they should understand from heterosexual people too. To not scream 'homophobe alert!' at the slightest misinterpreted word. Let's just get all along, ok? I've been stigmatised too much and wrongly as a Big Bad in the past just because of people twisting my words the way they wanted. @Forse: My point still stands. Why a gay parade? Tell you what, there recently was one in my city. There were people doing each other on the street. In public. It's been in the news, even. What is that supposed to make us, heterosexuals, think of gay people that way in this very specific situation? Of course I'm being a bit black and white here, as there of course are also heterosexuals doing these kinds of things. But let's just focus on this very specific situation. A gay parade is when gay people become most 'visible' to heterosexuals. What are these heterosexuals supposed to think when they see gay people jerking off right at their front door? When they see a car full of naked people throwing their underwear on the street? When they see things like that? Obviously it's gonna annoy people. There are far better ways to show your point and what that black woman did was indeed a far better example. Showing your sexual orientation doesn't have to be obscene and distasteful to others, because it will only have the opposite effect on them.
@fitscotgaymer: Because sometimes saying 'I have no problems with gays!' over and over again just saves you the trouble of getting into a flamewar and being wrongly stigmatised as a homophobe and seen as the worst scum on earth. Because, yes,political correctness. I decided to not give in to just nodding my head meekly like a sheep and therefore pointed out that I sometimes DO have problems with gay people, as in the Gay parades and the ones forcing their sexual orientation on you by overly obsessing over it. Defending yourself for the gazillionth time gets tiring after a while. No doubt it's the same for gay people, but this is something they should understand from heterosexual people too. To not scream 'homophobe alert!' at the slightest misinterpreted word. Let's just get all along, ok? I've been stigmatised too much and wrongly as a Big Bad in the past just because of people twisting my words the way they wanted. @Forse: My point still stands. Why a gay parade? Tell you what, there recently was one in my city. There were people doing each other on the street. In public. It's been in the news, even. What is that supposed to make us, heterosexuals, think of gay people that way in this very specific situation? Of course I'm being a bit black and white here, as there of course are also heterosexuals doing these kinds of things. But let's just focus on this very specific situation. A gay parade is when gay people become most 'visible' to heterosexuals. What are these heterosexuals supposed to think when they see gay people jerking off right at their front door? When they see a car full of naked people throwing their underwear on the street? When they see things like that? Obviously it's gonna annoy people. There are far better ways to show your point and what that black woman did was indeed a far better example. Showing your sexual orientation doesn't have to be obscene and distasteful to others, because it will only have the opposite effect on them.
@Kitteh_On_A_Cloud I do not mean to stigmatize you, and I think that discussion is all good and healthy. It is good that you express your feelings.
But my point still stands too. A gay parade is still needed because acknowledging someone's existence is the first step towards accepting and tolerating.
I don't really want to get into the specifics of the parade you describe, since I wasn't there. Of course people have done unnecessary things on gay parades. People do unnecessary things all the time, at all kinds of social events. Still, that doesn't mean gay parades as a whole are not needed. They sorely are.
The most dangerous way of pushing someone down is by saying that they don't exist, hence the need of gay parades. I am not saying that you are a homophobe or that you don't acknowledge them. From what I've read, you seem tolerant.
As for sexual acts in public, some would argue that it would be most natural if everyone did this in public, but that's another discussion entirely. And not related to this discussion really.
Anyway, in short: I can see how that parade made you frown, but it's best not to judge all parades by the one that went wrong.
My first thought is that Sune's followers would attempt to show them the beauty of the physical form in an attempt to 'wake up their senses.' They might regard asexuals as lacking a necessary joy. They might play tricks on asexuals, such as streaking them or suddenly stripping in front of them, just to see if they can incite attraction.
My first thought is that Sune's followers would attempt to show them the beauty of the physical form in an attempt to 'wake up their senses.' They might regard asexuals as lacking a necessary joy. They might play tricks on asexuals, such as streaking them or suddenly stripping in front of them, just to see if they can incite attraction.
Comments
I just don't understand whether adding a gay romance to BG was meant to enhance it. No really. I don't understand.
I was especially upset to learn that Dorn, that iron-clad Manowar-like warrior, was gay. Can I be upset without being regarded as a homophobe? I don't know, but I do.
I respect you fine. You just clearly don't understand what I was saying. If you did you wouldn't keep saying things like I am insinuating or saying that you have no respect for gay people.
I used being gay as an EXAMPLE to illustrate my point. Nothing more.
I have't said you don't like or respect gay people. It's you who feels the need to declare "I have no problem with the gays!"
I could have used many other things as my example, as I said. It could have been a Dungeons and Dragons fan I was talking about, or a Jersey Shore Fan. Or someone who hates television. And so on.
The example is not the point, and you are taking it like it is.
And no offense, that's your damage not mine.
Sorry again if I have offended you. It certainly wasn't my intention. I have just been trying unsuccesfully to explain myself adequately. I failed obviously.
As I have said repeatedly now, I was merely trying to point out that making assumptions about people you don't know is rude and bad. And you ought to avoid doing it.
Thats it. There was nothing else to my arguement/point.
@egalor_original
I am getting tired of you (and some others) putting words in my mouth.
I never said he was wrong. I said he has clearly missed the point of what I was saying, given his reactions to it. Much like you miss the point, of oh so many things.
Also: This quote right here shows you are not at all tolerant of LGBT people contrary to your claims otherwise.
In that very quote you say several offensive and bigotted things.
1) You said gay people can be gay as long as it isn't anywhere near you. With the implication that there will be consequences if they are gay near you.
2) You said gays shouldn't be seen in case they corrupt The Children. With the implication that we wil spread our gayness to them and that would be wrong. Cos theres something wrong with being gay.
3) You strongly imply Gay=Pedophile. Again.
4) You out right say gay people are abnormal. Like there is something wrong with us.
And yet you have the audacity to claim "I'm not a bigot though!"
Don't make me laugh.
@egalor_original TL;DR
Bacon. :P
So, there are IRL gays in this thread, much as I suspected. Ouch. At least it justifies your views on the game a bit.
I could discuss the harm for heterosexuals arising from homosexuality elsewhere, but not on this thread. Preferably better out of BG forums.
And yes, to conclude my rant, it's just a pity they have introduced gay romance to BG without any need. I reckon I am entitled to my own opinion, but I also believe I am not alone. You are free to consider me a gay-hater if you will, though. It's much easier, than to try to understand a different point of view.
I am gay.
I am a gamer.
I love Baldur's Gate, but I find it sad that others get access to content that I won't be able to fully enjoy because they are part of the eponymous "majority" and I am not.
Why should I be excluded from the full enjoyment of the game just because I don't form part of the argueable "majority"?
It's not like adding a small bit of content for me and people like me, takes away anything from you and people like you. It doesn't remove from the game. It adds to it so that more people can get the same experience as you.
And that is un-needful and wrong is it?
I am sorry but that is -at best- a selfish attitude to have. And at worst it is outright bigotry.
Then again, most of the people who play BG these days, from what it seems, would've been brought up without the idea Homosexuality does nothing to them. Or whatever. But still, it is no excuse to cause a thread that's started to inform people has turned into a war ground for Heterosexuality V.S. Homosexuality. Can't people just enjoy the game, even if the characters get specified sexuality dialogue?
I can't see how it directly affects anyone in a negative way. Just because your party member might be of a certain sexuality doesn't mean you'll then turn into that character or it's sexual orientation. The game isn't forcing you to play those characters. You can remove them from the party. It seems everyone's arguments against it are purely; There is homosexuality in the game.
However I don't understand what the problem is. I'd love to understand everyone's argument but they just seem biased and there's no real cause or grounds for that side of the argument.
I haven't followed your entire discussion with fitscotgaymer. But I think you need to know why there are Pride parades. They have been very necessary, and still are. Society is not a tolerant place, and one of society's ways of fighting gay rights is, you guessed it: silence. Therefore, an important way of standing up for ones rights is to get dressed up and go on a parade. If heterosexuals had been discriminated against there would, no doubt in my mind, be straight-parades. But as we all know, straight people as a group haven't been persecuted.
Let's compare it to rights for african americans. Rosa Parks fought for her beliefs by not giving up her bus seat to a white man. Lots of people back then thought that she was annoying and "in their face". Yet, what she did was pretty much exactly what gay people do when they parade and don't hide their lifestyles.
I agree with you that it's unfortunate that some subjects are very touchy "hot". However, the fault doesn't lie with those who are touchy. The reason people become touchy is because they have a background of not being tolerated (compare to racism as above)! Having tradition and religion (and in many countries law) teamed up against you it's actually quite natural. In short: "touchy-ness" is simply the product of society's very real discrimination.
To finish off, everyone needs to watch this video:
@egalor_original
If it matters to you; I am not gay. I just have a strong and firm belief that love is love, and love is good.
I find it unethical at best.
@egalor_original thank you.
And... turns out that his "do not annoy me with such simplistic notions of morality" COULD indeed be referring both to his blackguard status and his bisexual status.
I don't know where everybody took the idea that homosexuality and bisexuality were widespread and commonly accepted in Baldur's Gate like in Dragon Age.
We needed to trouble Ed Greenwood to realize that yes, it does happen, no, it's in no way common, and yes, there is prejudice. All of which was quite predictable.
Heh.
@Forse: My point still stands. Why a gay parade? Tell you what, there recently was one in my city. There were people doing each other on the street. In public. It's been in the news, even. What is that supposed to make us, heterosexuals, think of gay people that way in this very specific situation? Of course I'm being a bit black and white here, as there of course are also heterosexuals doing these kinds of things. But let's just focus on this very specific situation. A gay parade is when gay people become most 'visible' to heterosexuals. What are these heterosexuals supposed to think when they see gay people jerking off right at their front door? When they see a car full of naked people throwing their underwear on the street? When they see things like that? Obviously it's gonna annoy people. There are far better ways to show your point and what that black woman did was indeed a far better example. Showing your sexual orientation doesn't have to be obscene and distasteful to others, because it will only have the opposite effect on them.
@Forse: My point still stands. Why a gay parade? Tell you what, there recently was one in my city. There were people doing each other on the street. In public. It's been in the news, even. What is that supposed to make us, heterosexuals, think of gay people that way in this very specific situation? Of course I'm being a bit black and white here, as there of course are also heterosexuals doing these kinds of things. But let's just focus on this very specific situation. A gay parade is when gay people become most 'visible' to heterosexuals. What are these heterosexuals supposed to think when they see gay people jerking off right at their front door? When they see a car full of naked people throwing their underwear on the street? When they see things like that? Obviously it's gonna annoy people. There are far better ways to show your point and what that black woman did was indeed a far better example. Showing your sexual orientation doesn't have to be obscene and distasteful to others, because it will only have the opposite effect on them.
Double post. lol.
I do not mean to stigmatize you, and I think that discussion is all good and healthy. It is good that you express your feelings.
But my point still stands too. A gay parade is still needed because acknowledging someone's existence is the first step towards accepting and tolerating.
I don't really want to get into the specifics of the parade you describe, since I wasn't there. Of course people have done unnecessary things on gay parades. People do unnecessary things all the time, at all kinds of social events. Still, that doesn't mean gay parades as a whole are not needed. They sorely are.
The most dangerous way of pushing someone down is by saying that they don't exist, hence the need of gay parades. I am not saying that you are a homophobe or that you don't acknowledge them. From what I've read, you seem tolerant.
As for sexual acts in public, some would argue that it would be most natural if everyone did this in public, but that's another discussion entirely. And not related to this discussion really.
Anyway, in short: I can see how that parade made you frown, but it's best not to judge all parades by the one that went wrong.