Homosexuality

[Bilanthri]

If someone were to OOC asking me to do an alternate scene for a rape scenario, I'd have to look at my char and what else he/she might do before I agreed or disagreed.

If someone were to OOC asking me to do an alternate scene for a rape scenario...I'd have to understand that, as a role-playing game, there is a certain amount of OOC cooperation required to ensure that all parties enjoy the encounter. Forcing a scenario on someone when they have clearly stated that they have no desire to capitulate is rude, and if that scenario is potentially traumatizing, for whatever reason, then it is not just rude, but completely insensitive to the emotional state of another human being.

And yea...what Booya said too.

Edit: I find myself concerned with the thought of what sort of person would actually choose to play a rapist. I know we're here to stretch our boundaries and put ourselves in other people's chalton boots, but really...a rapist?

[Marauder Moe]

Edit: I find myself concerned with the thought of what sort of person would actually choose to play a rapist. I know we're here to stretch our boundaries and put ourselves in other people's chalton boots, but really...a rapist?

Consider them an actor playing a villain in a movie, enhancing the setting/story for our benefit, rather than someone fulfilling some sort of twisted personal fantasy.

[Bilanthri]

Edit: I find myself concerned with the thought of what sort of person would actually choose to play a rapist. I know we're here to stretch our boundaries and put ourselves in other people's chalton boots, but really...a rapist?

Consider them an actor playing a villain in a movie, enhancing the setting/story for our benefit, rather than someone fulfilling some sort of twisted personal fantasy.

That's valid. The Rocky & Bullwinkle Show would have been pretty boring without Boris and Natasha.

But if you are playing one of these ne'er-do-well types, it requires a great deal of personal maturity, responsibility, and empathy. Otherwise, you're just playing a griefer.

Edit: Pardon the extended derail.

[Anaiah]

To clarify, on rape:

Before you pursue any part of the plot which would actually result in it, you must have consent from the other player. This can result in a ban if it is not gotten.

On the subject of sexuality, I refer to Erythil's tongue in cheek, and very amusing post:

Zalanthas is a genderqueer paradise...we like it because it's cool...

[Intrepid237]

Way to derail a post lmao

Code Select Expand

Derail: Master

[rishenko]

***Edit: Eh, no need.

[Cindy42]

Prejudice is an evil penguin I will single-handedly kill someday. Then I will make it into sushi and eat it.

[spicemustflow]

Prejudice is an evil penguin I will single-handedly kill someday. Then I will make it into sushi and eat it.

[Intrepid237]

There is evidence to support genetic disposition to homosexuality. Not necessarily and end all be all "gay gene", more of a collection of genetic traits that gives someone a disposition for homosexuality.

For instance, most males' ring finger is longer than their index finger. For women it's the opposite. However, a study showed that something like 90 percent of gay men have a longer index finger than ring finger. And visa versa for women. So according to this, gay men have some genetic feminine traits that almost no straight men have.

[Kalai]

Hmm. Mine, appropriately enough if that study's onto something, seem to be precisely the same length.

[Anaiah]

My ring finger is nearly half an inch longer than my index finger. It goes both ways in accuracy. 

[a strange shadow]

Ignore me. I haven't had my coffee yet.

My skill_reading_comprehension is at a -30 penalty right now.

[IAmJacksOpinion]

As was said, it's in the documents that homosexuality is common and openly accepted on Zalanthas. So, you wouldn't feel a cultural strain react different to two men boinking than you would to a man and a woman, or two women. You CAN, and that's entirely up to you and how you play your character. All my characters are strait or predominantly strait males, because I am, and because I have no desire to act out any sort of sexual RP with a male character.

An example of this is that I once had a character who was constantly hit on, or at least had sexual hints dropped by a fellow clan member of the same gender. My character would always just laugh it off and say "Sorry, prefer the company of the other sex. But with a pipe of spice and a keg of ale, who knows?" It was an IC way of saying OOC "no thanks, but my character's not gonna go 'a queer bashin', so don't think less of it."

Your character can still hold any orientation, or find any sexual thing gross. It's entirely up to do. The important part of the rule is that, even if your character was down with two girls going at it, but not two guys, he shouldn't call names and spout sexist slurs. That's there as much for respect of the players, as for the freedom of RP. Griping uncomfortably and telling them to "get a room" - totally okay.

[morrigan]

This can be a tough one to get around. I know that most of us dealing with the homosexuality in our time in the real world have come to associate people's dislike for gay people as a religious issue, but throughout history this wasn't always the case. It can be hard for some people to roleplay a character and get into the mindset that homosexual acts and relationships are perfectly acceptable, regardless of their RL feelings. Homosexuality was seen as a bad thing, not originally because of religions, but because in times past societies actually had to struggle to survive. Yes, I know it's hard to imagine with our HUGE population in modern times, but in a village of 30 people, that gay guy was just not on board with the whole survival thing. Also, people disliked gay individuals because it's natural to dislike something that is personally unappealing. For example, I have no problem at all with the gay and lesbian community, however the thought of personally engaging in sex with a man isn't just something that doesn't interest me, but the thought of actually personally engaging in the acts involved(not getting detailed here of course) is distasteful and...I can't think of a good word because repulsive sounds mean, but I suppose that's what it is. I have absolutely no desire to put certain things in my mouth... (Amos can chew on whatever he likes though) :p

So...where my rambling here is going..is if you as a players just can't get your head around being 100% accepting of it, think of a -good- reason why your character dislikes it. Maybe he/she was raped repeatedly by a member of the same sex as a child and now the thought of same sex intercourse causes them to have negative physical/emotional reactions. Maybe he/she has some divergent philosophy in which every member of society should be contributing toward population. Just make sure that if you RP it out, that it's clear there is some other problem, not just a "Eww....gay people!" kinda thing.

[Feco]

This can be a tough one to get around. I know that most of us dealing with the homosexuality in our time in the real world have come to associate people's dislike for gay people as a religious issue, but throughout history this wasn't always the case. It can be hard for some people to roleplay a character and get into the mindset that homosexual acts and relationships are perfectly acceptable, regardless of their RL feelings. Homosexuality was seen as a bad thing, not originally because of religions, but because in times past societies actually had to struggle to survive. Yes, I know it's hard to imagine with our HUGE population in modern times, but in a village of 30 people, that gay guy was just not on board with the whole survival thing. Also, people disliked gay individuals because it's natural to dislike something that is personally unappealing. For example, I have no problem at all with the gay and lesbian community, however the thought of personally engaging in sex with a man isn't just something that doesn't interest me, but the thought of actually personally engaging in the acts involved(not getting detailed here of course) is distasteful and...I can't think of a good word because repulsive sounds mean, but I suppose that's what it is. I have absolutely no desire to put certain things in my mouth... (Amos can chew on whatever he likes though) :p

So...where my rambling here is going..is if you as a players just can't get your head around being 100% accepting of it, think of a -good- reason why your character dislikes it. Maybe he/she was raped repeatedly by a member of the same sex as a child and now the thought of same sex intercourse causes them to have negative physical/emotional reactions. Maybe he/she has some divergent philosophy in which every member of society should be contributing toward population. Just make sure that if you RP it out, that it's clear there is some other problem, not just a "Eww....gay people!" kinda thing.

Hate to derail a bit, but I believe you're very wrong.  There is a very complicated history of sexuality, and I assure you it probably didn't start in "villages" where the "gay guy was just not on board."  You're right in that there was no sexual paradise like Armageddon is, but to boil it down like that is folly.

Back on topic, you really shouldn't try and justify your feelings IG, because you don't have to.  You don't have to view ANY sexual content if you don't want to.  In addition, not all characters are required to be homo, hetero, or bisexual.  Your character can still be heterosexual, and the only reason he/she needs is "that's what I like."  Divergent ideas which discriminate against homosexuals don't make for good, fun roleplay.

[morrigan]

This can be a tough one to get around. I know that most of us dealing with the homosexuality in our time in the real world have come to associate people's dislike for gay people as a religious issue, but throughout history this wasn't always the case. It can be hard for some people to roleplay a character and get into the mindset that homosexual acts and relationships are perfectly acceptable, regardless of their RL feelings. Homosexuality was seen as a bad thing, not originally because of religions, but because in times past societies actually had to struggle to survive. Yes, I know it's hard to imagine with our HUGE population in modern times, but in a village of 30 people, that gay guy was just not on board with the whole survival thing. Also, people disliked gay individuals because it's natural to dislike something that is personally unappealing. For example, I have no problem at all with the gay and lesbian community, however the thought of personally engaging in sex with a man isn't just something that doesn't interest me, but the thought of actually personally engaging in the acts involved(not getting detailed here of course) is distasteful and...I can't think of a good word because repulsive sounds mean, but I suppose that's what it is. I have absolutely no desire to put certain things in my mouth... (Amos can chew on whatever he likes though) :p

So...where my rambling here is going..is if you as a players just can't get your head around being 100% accepting of it, think of a -good- reason why your character dislikes it. Maybe he/she was raped repeatedly by a member of the same sex as a child and now the thought of same sex intercourse causes them to have negative physical/emotional reactions. Maybe he/she has some divergent philosophy in which every member of society should be contributing toward population. Just make sure that if you RP it out, that it's clear there is some other problem, not just a "Eww....gay people!" kinda thing.

Hate to derail a bit, but I believe you're very wrong.  There is a very complicated history of sexuality, and I assure you it probably didn't start in "villages" where the "gay guy was just not on board."  You're right in that there was no sexual paradise like Armageddon is, but to boil it down like that is folly.

Back on topic, you really shouldn't try and justify your feelings IG, because you don't have to.  You don't have to view ANY sexual content if you don't want to.  In addition, not all characters are required to be homo, hetero, or bisexual.  Your character can still be heterosexual, and the only reason he/she needs is "that's what I like."  Divergent ideas which discriminate against homosexuals don't make for good, fun roleplay.

You can -assure- me that it -probably- didn't? Those don't go together. You can either assure me something did or did not happen, or you can think it probably did or did not.

As for the rest, the person asked because they -did- see some sexual content, regardless of whether they wanted to, and wanted to know how to react.

"Divergent idea which discriminate blah don't make for good, fun roleplay."  For you. ...there was nothing wrong with either of the scenarios I suggested if the person had an issue. They weren't discrimination against a group. They were personal drama that one person could use. It may be fun for someone else. So that statement was an opinion, and pure conjecture.

[Feco]

Fine.

In ancient Greek society, homosexuality among men (not women) was normal, and as far as I know, there isn't even a word for homosexuality in the languages spoken in their time.  The same sort of thing existed in Roman societies, with obvious caveats such as the "submissive" male would be the one looked down upon.  It wasn't for being "gay," though.  It was for being "the woman."

"Homosexuality" is a fairly recently created term to describe a sexual orientation.  It's hard to wrap your head around, but the idea of sexual orientation just didn't exist for most of human history and for many societies.

If a person is encountering sexual things in game without being asked for consent (which has been dealt with previously in this thread), then they need to file complaints.  It's against the rules.  There is no need to bring your real life descriminations into the game world.  As long as everyone is following the rules, you shouldn't be made uncomfortable.  If you're uncomfortable with sexual themes (prostitution, slavery, sexually charged (though not explicit) banter etc.), violence (excluding torture), or fantasy discrimination, than Armageddon isn't the place for you.  These are things which happen without consent.

Discrimination against the Armageddon "races" can be fun because it isn't the same as racism in real life.  Discrimination against skin color in Armageddon is unheard of, and I assume staff would punish anyone doing so.  Descrimination against sex is unheard of in Armageddon.  There are no gender roles.  Sexual orientation only exists because we are (largely) incapable of imagining a world without it.  If this were a perfect game, you would just do what you do, and not worry about labeling yourself.

The moment you start marginalizing real groups such as homosexuals, women, and people of different shades of skin, is the moment you start marginalizing players, and not characters.  I'm sorry a handfull of people find that fun to do, but it's against the rules.

[Thunkkin]

Also, people disliked gay individuals because it's natural to dislike something that is personally unappealing.

You  mean SOME people. Not just "people." I'm also very skeptical of your use of the word "natural" in this context.

I remember an enlightening moment for me a long time ago when I was chatting frankly with one of my first gay friends. He looked to me sympathetically and said, "Girls can be a lot of fun to hang out with, but when I have to imagine ... down there ... it's just so ..." and then he shuddered with horror. The thought of sex with a woman made him queasy.

Fact: Most Zalanthans do not share our sexual or gender role norms.

That we're discussing reasons for why a Zalanthan might find homosexual sex disgusting but not why a Zalanthan would find heterosexual sex disgusting directly reflects our own culture's current biases.

ON PREVIEW: What Feco said.

Finally, there are/were plenty of cultures that existed apart from middle-eastern monotheism in which the norm was for people to have sex with their friends of their own gender (or sometimes older role models of their own gender) while also having sex with the opposite sex for the purpose of child-bearing (and fun). Any comments about villages/tribes before the spread of writing is purely speculative. Observation of primates tells us that plenty of primates engage in homosexual sex, some exclusively so. It is very common among the primates that most resemble us sexually. Thus, a society that contains a diverse set of sexual practices seems to be more "normal" and "natural" than the human societies of the last few millennia that attempt to restrict human sexuality in a variety of ways.

I can absolutely understand a small tribe pressuring all its members to reproduce. I can even imagine a few remote Zalanthan tribal groups that actively discourage homosexuality in order to focus on the reproductive survival of their members. But I imagine that tribes in which no one cares what you do in your spare time as long as you're making sure that babies happen are even more normal. It certainly seems to be the case for human pre-history.

[Feco]

Fact: Most Zalanthans do not share our sexual or gender role norms.

This is key.  Even if you want to think humans "naturally" dislike homosexual behavior, it doesn't apply.

[musashi]

Feco and Thunkkin pretty much typed out everything I was going to say in response to morrigan before I could even realize he'd said it.

But yeah ... saying that homosexuality has a history of discrimination that predates certain religious dogma is um ... well, wrong. To the best of my knowledge.

And homosexuality pervades almost all species of animals in nature with any kind of social behavior so if being queer isn't "natural" then I'm not sure what is.

[Taven]

I thought that Feco and Thunkkin both had good posts on the issue.

I wanted to add something to it by talking about the concept of homosexuality itself. In today's society, you are homosexual or bisexual (in some cases) if you enjoy having sex with someone of the same gender. The common modern thought is that this is part of who you are. It can be very useful to have a title like that, because it gives the group as a whole power and a way to defend themselves. However, in another way, it's also pretty silly. There's a large scale of things that you can do and like for sex. Why, of all things, is it the gender of the person who you sleep with that defines you?

Coming back into Zalanthas, I don't think that making a character who hates homosexuality is at all acceptable. If someone tried to design a character who had been brutally abused in their background by dark-skinned people and thus tried to make a PC who hated all dark-skinned people, players and staff would be absolutely appalled. There's no way that it would be approved, and for good reason. In Zalanthas, there is fantasy discrimination as Feco says. Nobody wants to enter a game and see discrimination that is against the documentation, and that touches on real-life and sensitive issues. I realize that you can be the exception to documentation sometimes and sometimes have an odd PC, but in the case of keeping real world discrimination out of the game, in my opinion it's as set in stone as "elves don't ride".

[morrigan]

Fine.

In ancient Greek society, homosexuality among men (not women) was normal, and as far as I know, there isn't even a word for homosexuality in the languages spoken in their time.  The same sort of thing existed in Roman societies, with obvious caveats such as the "submissive" male would be the one looked down upon.  It wasn't for being "gay," though.  It was for being "the woman."

"Homosexuality" is a fairly recently created term to describe a sexual orientation.  It's hard to wrap your head around, but the idea of sexual orientation just didn't exist for most of human history and for many societies.

If a person is encountering sexual things in game without being asked for consent (which has been dealt with previously in this thread), then they need to file complaints.  It's against the rules.  There is no need to bring your real life descriminations into the game world.  As long as everyone is following the rules, you shouldn't be made uncomfortable.  If you're uncomfortable with sexual themes (prostitution, slavery, sexually charged (though not explicit) banter etc.), violence (excluding torture), or fantasy discrimination, than Armageddon isn't the place for you.  These are things which happen without consent.

Discrimination against the Armageddon "races" can be fun because it isn't the same as racism in real life.  Discrimination against skin color in Armageddon is unheard of, and I assume staff would punish anyone doing so.  Descrimination against sex is unheard of in Armageddon.  There are no gender roles.  Sexual orientation only exists because we are (largely) incapable of imagining a world without it.  If this were a perfect game, you would just do what you do, and not worry about labeling yourself.

The moment you start marginalizing real groups such as homosexuals, women, and people of different shades of skin, is the moment you start marginalizing players, and not characters.  I'm sorry a handfull of people find that fun to do, but it's against the rules.

The same sex relationships being tolerated in Greek and Roman civilization were the exception, not the norm throughout history. In the majority of societies, it was looked down upon. You can't use a minority exception to make a blanket statement. I'm curious where the information that the idea sexual orientation didn't exist until recently comes from. Perhaps we didn't have a word for it, I've never cared to put a date to the creation of the word homosexuality, but since the dawn of recorded history you can find references to homosexual acts, which means the idea -did- exist, and whether the idea existed before recorded history or not cannot be proven or shown to be false.

I agree with you on the second part, those things are a part of the game experience, and if they absolutely cannot handle it, they probably won't enjoy playing here.

The part about racial discrimination being fun in Arm because they aren't real people, just doesn't hold up. People don't discriminate against people in the real world because of the color of their skin. They discriminate because of behavioral and cultural differences(real and imagined). Discrimination is discrimination. Just because one person is more sensitive to one sort doesn't make it worse than another.

[musashi]

Can you give an example of these majority of societies in which it was looked down upon?

Because from where I'm standing ... homosexuality was acceptable in ancient Egypt, ancient China, and ancient India ... just to name a few.

So I respectfully challenge your assertion that Feco was using an "exception" to make a blanket statement.

[morrigan]

Also, people disliked gay individuals because it's natural to dislike something that is personally unappealing.

You  mean SOME people. Not just "people." I'm also very skeptical of your use of the word "natural" in this context.

I remember an enlightening moment for me a long time ago when I was chatting frankly with one of my first gay friends. He looked to me sympathetically and said, "Girls can be a lot of fun to hang out with, but when I have to imagine ... down there ... it's just so ..." and then he shuddered with horror. The thought of sex with a woman made him queasy.

Fact: Most Zalanthans do not share our sexual or gender role norms.

That we're discussing reasons for why a Zalanthan might find homosexual sex disgusting but not why a Zalanthan would find heterosexual sex disgusting directly reflects our own culture's current biases.

ON PREVIEW: What Feco said.

Finally, there are/were plenty of cultures that existed apart from middle-eastern monotheism in which the norm was for people to have sex with their friends of their own gender (or sometimes older role models of their own gender) while also having sex with the opposite sex for the purpose of child-bearing (and fun). Any comments about villages/tribes before the spread of writing is purely speculative. Observation of primates tells us that plenty of primates engage in homosexual sex, some exclusively so. It is very common among the primates that most resemble us sexually. Thus, a society that contains a diverse set of sexual practices seems to be more "normal" and "natural" than the human societies of the last few millennia that attempt to restrict human sexuality in a variety of ways.

I can absolutely understand a small tribe pressuring all its members to reproduce. I can even imagine a few remote Zalanthan tribal groups that actively discourage homosexuality in order to focus on the reproductive survival of their members. But I imagine that tribes in which no one cares what you do in your spare time as long as you're making sure that babies happen are even more normal. It certainly seems to be the case for human pre-history.

This actually helped illustrate my point. Your gay friend was repulsed by the thought female genitalia. Some men are repulsed by the thought of other men's. So, if a man is grossed out by the thought of having sex with another man, he's discriminating, but if a man is grossed out by the thought of having sex with a woman, he's enlightened and better than me?

It's not -some- people. People, dislike and feel uncomfortable about things that do not appeal to them. Fact. Doesn't matter how liberal you want to be. Or how cool and accepting you want to be. Why do you think religions made homosexuality a taboo? It's not because god, santa, the easter bunny told them to. It's because the people who made the religion were against homosexuality. So, it predated the religions that were against it.

[morrigan]

Can you give an example of these majority of societies in which it was looked down upon?

Because from where I'm standing ... homosexuality was acceptable in ancient Egypt, ancient China, and ancient India ... just to name a few.

So I respectfully challenge your assertion that Feco was using an "exception" to make a blanket statement.

I'll have to look into that and get back to you when I have some time to read. I know I've read about various, but will get quotes and links here in a bit.