Do Gays Not Exist in Bioware's Star Wars?

[Acid Armageddon]

I don't dislike homosexuals, just the lifestyle.

What is wrong with their lifestyle? That they live togheter with a person of the same gender? That some of them like to go to the opera?

As long as they don't shove it in your face when you talk to them, I could care less. It's their choice.

Have that ever happend to you? That they shoved 'it' in your face? I don't think there is a sane person on the planet who would to that to anyone.

Maybe you meen that they would become attracted and fall in love with you? But if you fall in love with a girl, you don't go and shake your pride in their face now do you? So why should they?

Obviously you have your own issues if you are trying to call me out on my statements. I said what I said in the most respectable manner I could, so thats not the issue. My main issue is the fact that, yes, I have had some homosexual people I know in real life come out and flaunt it in front of me in an undecent manner. Now, I'm not saying that all of them do that, but the few I have met seem to not care what anyone thinks (which doesn;t really matter), but the way they acted publically annoyed me. There was no need for them to act like they did.

I was just trying to understand your post, not offend you. I did not understand what you meant with "their lifestyle". No all homosexuals live in the same way and that's what confused me about your post.

But I have to ask you, where do you hang out if someone goes up to you and shake in in your face? I doubt that it was one the street... Where did it happend?

Again, I meant no offense.

It happened at the college I'm going to...I was hanging out with some friends in the cafeteria, then some of their friends showed up......thats about it really

 

[Shycte]

It happened at the college I'm going to...I was hanging out with some friends in the cafeteria, then some of their friends showed up......thats about it really

Okay. I thought that you were one of those guys that complained about it being to much naked guys in the locker room.

In the cafeteria however... It's okay to complain.

 

[Alex_P]

I think the rest of the world isn't so neurotic when it comes to *sex* but, well, when it comes to *sexual expression* I'm not so sure.

I think the rest of the world is generally a bit behind in most forms of expression. But I just can't speak with as much authority about it, so I stuck with talking 'bout America.

-- Alex

 

[Cabboge]

Im not homophobic but I do not believe any type of homosexual content belongs in video games

Its an MMO and if i recall they said in the star wars universe, so its not like they have decided this, its just the way it is

Yes, you are homophobic. You just stated that you (weren't homophobic) did not believe in homosexuality in games. That means you are homophobic. Get. The Fuck. Out. And then try growing up, kay?

I dont mind massive guitar solos but wouldn't want them shoved in my face in the middle of a game

Im guessing its people like you that would make people homophobic in the first place, you seem awfully defensive

No, he's right. You are homophobic. You don't get to say, "video games shouldn't get to have black people in it, but I'm not racist!" Just because you add "but I'm not a racist!", doesn't make it so. You'd still be a racist. Just like you're homophobic.

Your guitar solo metaphor only goes further to prove your hatred/fear of homosexuality.

I'm going to go with painfully here. He's not homophobic for not wanting homosexuality in a video game. I really don't care as long as the game's story calls for it. However, it's still a bit taboo to be including this and lets face it, lesbians are usually a big fantasy for most men. Lets think about the Sims for a second, who openly allowed men to marry men or women to marry women. Did we all make a big fuss about this? No, so who cares two shits about any sexuality in a game. I think it should all just lay off unless the games story really calls for it (or its a chick cause lets face the facts, sex sells especially hot women).

Before we all jump the "homophobic" train, I want the opportunity to say I am bi-sexual. I am totally for all types of sexuality and I do have a boyfriend. So lets all just take a deep breath before we freak out ok? Oh and being homophobic and actually hating homosexuals are very diffrent. Just because someone is homophobic doesn't mean you hate homosexuals. It just means you are frightened or uncomfortable which is understandable considering that most people grow up in completely heterosexual households and don't really encounter homosexuality until their high school or college years.

 

[runtheplacered]

Im not homophobic but I do not believe any type of homosexual content belongs in video games

Its an MMO and if i recall they said in the star wars universe, so its not like they have decided this, its just the way it is

Yes, you are homophobic. You just stated that you (weren't homophobic) did not believe in homosexuality in games. That means you are homophobic. Get. The Fuck. Out. And then try growing up, kay?

I dont mind massive guitar solos but wouldn't want them shoved in my face in the middle of a game

Im guessing its people like you that would make people homophobic in the first place, you seem awfully defensive

No, he's right. You are homophobic. You don't get to say, "video games shouldn't get to have black people in it, but I'm not racist!" Just because you add "but I'm not a racist!", doesn't make it so. You'd still be a racist. Just like you're homophobic.

Your guitar solo metaphor only goes further to prove your hatred/fear of homosexuality.

I'm going to go with painfully here. He's not homophobic for not wanting homosexuality in a video game. I really don't care as long as the game's story calls for it. However, it's still a bit taboo to be including this and lets face it, lesbians are usually a big fantasy for most men. Lets think about the Sims for a second, who openly allowed men to marry men or women to marry women. Did we all make a big fuss about this? No, so who cares two shits about any sexuality in a game. I think it should all just lay off unless the games story really calls for it (or its a chick cause lets face the facts, sex sells especially hot women).

Before we all jump the "homophobic" train, I want the opportunity to say I am bi-sexual. I am totally for all types of sexuality and I do have a boyfriend. So lets all just take a deep breath before we freak out ok? Oh and being homophobic and actually hating homosexuals are very diffrent. Just because someone is homophobic doesn't mean you hate homosexuals. It just means you are frightened or uncomfortable which is understandable considering that most people grow up in completely heterosexual households and don't really encounter homosexuality until their high school or college years.

Man, you are seriously late on this train. If you don't feel like going back a few pages, I suggest looking the word homophobic up in the dictionary. The definition of homophobic absolutely means hating homosexuals. It's not different at all.

In fact, here you go: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/homophobic

 

[Thanatos34]

Agreed. In fact, some of my friends were having this exact same debate, and we concluded that the word "homophobic" was misleading and inaccurate, since so-called "homophobic" people generally aren't scared of gay people; they just hate them. Thus we coined a new term that we feel is more correct "homostygic" (the g is pronounced like the g in "midget"), coming from the Greek "stygos" which refers to intense hate. A homostygic is thus someone who hates gay people.

Semantics/etymology to the rescue!

Hmm, not bad.

At the same time, I do find that most "homostygics", while not scared of gay people, are rather scared of gay sex.

-- Alex

Or rather, they're scared they're gay themselves.

This argument is ludicrous. It's the same argument that one of my extreme right-wing friends, (note: I am rather conservative myself, but I have nothing on this guy), used to explain many white conservatives voting for Obama, (in our circle of friends):

"They are afraid they might be racist, so they are doing whatever they can to prove otherwise."

Then you have the opposite end of the political spectrum, my extreme left-wing friends, (of which, off-hand, I have more than the extreme right-wing... this is very interesting), who tried to use the following argument against me:

"You are obviously racist if you don't vote for Obama merely because you don't like him killing babies."

(Her words, not mine. Obviously Obama doesn't personally kill babies- and I gather you people can figure out what the topic of discussion actually was, and what I strongly disagree with Obama on.)

Both arguments might be true for an extreme minority of people, but if they are applied to the general population, then that is simply stupid. The majority of people that hate gays/hate gay's lifestyles, which, on a side note, is possible to do without hating gays- but that is a different story for a different time- do so because they believe their religion says they should do so, because they feel it is unnatural, or because they are afraid of what else it will lead to. (There are also a pretty strong minority that are afraid of what might happen to their kids in certain places- public schools, for one.)

You have some valid points, though those lines about reasons for voting Obama kind of went over my head. But the main difference I want to point out to you, if you're willing to listen, is that political alignment or religion is a choice, while your sexuality is not. In this age of political correctness and the counter-political correctness (VERY different from political in-correctness), people too often put these issues on the same level. The comment you quoted from me, was mostly tongue-in-cheek, yet it raises an important question.

Homophobes (or "homostygics", pick your poison) are not afraid of homosexuality because of what they see in it, but rather of what they don't see. "Familiarity breeds contempt" is an outdated idea to apply here, simply because the gays who are overly defensive (read: Perez Hilton) are not the same ones who just want to relate better to poorly-written romance in games. They're not hurting anybody, and, as Bioware has already shown, you can have gay representation in games without them turning into "gay pride festivals".

I disagree that your sexuality is not a choice, thus my relating the two things is perfectly feasible. Simply because one has a gene that predisposes one to do something, doesn't mean one has to do it. I have a gene that unless I exercise, it makes me fat, (like most people), but this does not mean I have no choice in the matter.

 

[Thanatos34]

The majority of people that hate gays/hate gay's lifestyles, which, on a side note, is possible to do without hating gays- but that is a different story for a different time- do so because they believe their religion says they should do so, because they feel it is unnatural, or because they are afraid of what else it will lead to. (There are also a pretty strong minority that are afraid of what might happen to their kids in certain places- public schools, for one.)

Nope, that's double talk.

If I hate your deeply-held beliefs, the way you behave every day, your personality, your very dreams and aspirations, then, yes, I am actually hating you. That's what it means to hate a fundamental aspect of someone's identity. Maybe I still like some other aspects about you, but that thing I hate -- damn straight it's still a part of you that I'm hating.

-- Alex

Perhaps, but it's not you personally that I hate.

For example, I hate the fact that my friend's mom just left his dad for another man. I think it was wrong of her to break her promise to her husband, and leave her three kids for him to handle. I do not, however, hate her, merely what she did to my friend and his family. (Most likely, only because I happen to know her personally, but still.) I do not have to approve of everything someone does in order not to hate them.

Also, I hate playing devil's advocate.

 

[Thanatos34]

Im not homophobic but

Yes you are

That's an idiotic and ignorant comeback. So one must be 100% pro-gay in order to not be "homophobic?" What if I say:

I'm not homophobic, but I dislike flaming gays

Is your witty response to this the same?

How about that witty response?

Now, if you want to say "I'm not homophobic, but I dislike flaming PEOPLE who shove their homosexuality in my face. (True.)" then that would not be an example of homophobia.

What you said, well, it is. Sorry, but that's the (Truth).

You could even say "I'm not homophobic, but I dislike flaming PEOPLE who shove their homosexuality in my face when it isn't MY sexuality" because then you're not talking about how gays make you uneasy, but how all over the top sexual content makes you uneasy unless it also turns you on or reminds you of your own sexuality. That would not be homophobic because that same logic would be available to gays--it would be a neutral criterion only adjusted for the particular observer.

It's amazing how people who are so pro-tolerance are so intolerant of others' viewpoints.

Actually, it's perfectly logical: to be pro-tolerance is to be against intolerant viewpoints. I don't see what you find so amazing about this.

The specific example I was quoting seemed to indicate that if he disagreed with gays at all, he was homophobic. This is what I mean, if you are not 100% pro-gay, then damn you to hell. Or the atheist's equivalent of it.

Second, your argument is rather illogical. Me saying that I detest flaming gays, does not mean that I do not also detest flaming heteros. It was obvious in the conversation that flaming heteros were not under discussion. The absence of something does not imply that I do not believe it. Take a logic class.

 

[The Donkey From Shrek]

Come on its Star Wars, its about jedis, blasters, spaceships and stuff.. its has nothing to do with homosexuality or any other sexuality, i mean the only thing you can do is questing and pvp.They could put gay quest givers but thats silly, kill 20 outlaws but till you do it me and my friend are going to be butt naked.

A game(MMO) where the main thing is to kill(wow, war, aoc) either pvp or pve should not contain any kind of sexual preference/content but if you want to be gay so much you can /kiss /hug on some1.And im sure when a dev makes such a game the least thing they look at is, should this character be gay or hetero, they look only in.. is the quality of the qiests and instances good enough? is the balance balanced?

 

[Alex_P]

Come on its Star Wars, its about jedis, blasters, spaceships and stuff.. its has nothing to do with homosexuality or any other sexuality, i mean the only thing you can do is questing and pvp.

People say Star Wars is light and fluffy and, for the most part, they're right. Yet Star Wars devotes about 1/10th of the original films to a corpulent hermaphroditic space-slug-thing that sexually enslaves women in order to give itself cultural power over the humanoids it deals with. That's pretty, err, nuanced as far as sex goes.

Also, as has been pointed out, TOR's fans are speculating about whether the "story" gameplay that BioWare promised will incorporate "romance plots". It's unusual for an MMOG, but that's what they've been talking about as a selling point for TOR for some time now (I mean "story" in general, not "romances" in particular). They don't want to make a game that's all just static NPCs doling out fetch quests.

-- Alex

 

[Thanatos34]

The majority of people that hate gays/hate gay's lifestyles, which, on a side note, is possible to do without hating gays- but that is a different story for a different time- do so because they believe their religion says they should do so, because they feel it is unnatural, or because they are afraid of what else it will lead to. (There are also a pretty strong minority that are afraid of what might happen to their kids in certain places- public schools, for one.)

Nope, that's double talk.

If I hate your deeply-held beliefs, the way you behave every day, your personality, your very dreams and aspirations, then, yes, I am actually hating you. That's what it means to hate a fundamental aspect of someone's identity. Maybe I still like some other aspects about you, but that thing I hate -- damn straight it's still a part of you that I'm hating.

-- Alex

Perhaps, but it's not you personally that I hate.

For example, I hate the fact that my friend's mom just left his dad for another man. I think it was wrong of her to break her promise to her husband, and leave her three kids for him to handle. I do not, however, hate her, merely what she did to my friend and his family. (Most likely, only because I happen to know her personally, but still.) I do not have to approve of everything someone does in order not to hate them.

Also, I hate playing devil's advocate.

Unless your friend's mom lives the 'promise breaking, adulteress lifestyle' the two situations do not compare.

Considering it's the third time she has done so, which she neglected to tell her husband about, you could make a case for it.

My point is if you call someone who merely disagrees with the gay lifestyle a homophobe, then you are certainly not going to win them over. They will immediately go on the defensive, and block out the rest of what you say. That is not the way to go about doing it.

This can actually be extended to a lot more than just the homosexuality debate, that is our major problem in America, both sides see the other as idiots. Those who are outside of both political systems think both of them are idiots. We need to be able to listen to each other, rather than labeling other people with derogatory terms, and mocking them for their beliefs. (This goes both ways, of course. If someone is actively mocking gay people, they should stop doing that as well.) Doing so will convince no one that you are right, only that you are an asshole. (Not saying you are, merely that it comes across that way.)

 

[Thanatos34]

Im not homophobic but

Yes you are

That's an idiotic and ignorant comeback. So one must be 100% pro-gay in order to not be "homophobic?" What if I say:

I'm not homophobic, but I dislike flaming gays

Is your witty response to this the same?

How about that witty response?

Now, if you want to say "I'm not homophobic, but I dislike flaming PEOPLE who shove their homosexuality in my face. (True.)" then that would not be an example of homophobia.

What you said, well, it is. Sorry, but that's the (Truth).

You could even say "I'm not homophobic, but I dislike flaming PEOPLE who shove their homosexuality in my face when it isn't MY sexuality" because then you're not talking about how gays make you uneasy, but how all over the top sexual content makes you uneasy unless it also turns you on or reminds you of your own sexuality. That would not be homophobic because that same logic would be available to gays--it would be a neutral criterion only adjusted for the particular observer.

It's amazing how people who are so pro-tolerance are so intolerant of others' viewpoints.

Actually, it's perfectly logical: to be pro-tolerance is to be against intolerant viewpoints. I don't see what you find so amazing about this.

The specific example I was quoting seemed to indicate that if he disagreed with gays at all, he was homophobic.

Then you did a piss-poor job of creating your own counter-example. That's not my fault. Don't blame me for your own inadequacies as a commenter.

Second, your argument is rather illogical.

How can an argument be "rather illogical"? Something is illogical or it isn't--there's no middle here that is not excluded. Don't try attacking other people for being illogical if you're going to describe something as being "rather illogical" which makes as much sense as saying 2 plus 2 is 'rather four-ish'.

Me saying that I detest flaming gays, does not mean that I do not also detest flaming heteros. It was obvious in the conversation that flaming heteros were not under discussion.

The fact that flaming heteros were obviously not under discussion is what makes it homophobic. Just like in a discussion of cheap Jews, the burden is on the person talking about cheap Jews to make it clear that they dislike all cheapness in all persons.

The absence of something does not imply that I do not believe it. Take a logic class.

The *curious* absence of it, however, does.

This is exactly what I've been talking about. People like you, who are so certain that their view, and only their view, is correct, contribute to the sharp divide in this country. Let me spell it out for ya.

First, I shall drop the kid-gloves. You're right, your post wasn't rather illogical, that was me simply being nice. For the record, a statement can be partially illogical.

Yours, however, was entirely illogical, and borderline idiotic.

Saying, "I'm not homophobic, but I dislike flaming homos who shove their sexuality in my face," is not homophobic. The entire statement is completely true, and I imagine many people would agree with me. You could add the clarifying statement that "Oh, and I really don't like when anyone shoves their sexuality in my face, despite the fact that I never have actually run into heterosexual who came up to me, and told me they were heterosexual, while obviously flaunting their sexuality."

You can argue that it is homophobic till you're blue in the face, but you are flat wrong.

Second, you grabbing a post I said a few pages back, when we have already discussed exactly what he was saying later, (the person who was quoting him, and me), and then ripping me on the post when I attempt to explain why I quoted him is juvenile. Yes, that wasn't what he was saying, but if you're going to pick and choose which posts of mine you read, don't blame me when that goes awry. If the person had indeed been saying what I thought he was, (which, if you simply look at the quote, it would seem that he is), then my example is perfectly fine to use in this scenario.

Third, the burden is not on me to make it clear I am not homophobic. It's a bullshit argument to say what you did. This entire article is about homosexuals not being in Star Wars, why would I bring flaming heteros into this? I don't give a shit about someone being offended by taking my comments way out of context and assuming something about me that I never even said. If they want to do so, fine. They are entirely wrong, but in this age of extreme PC, one must be so careful that nothing one says can be taken out of context and used to label oneself as a racist or homophobe.

Apparently, that now extends to things you don't say, as well as things you do. We should be able to have a civilized debate about this without people slapping the label homophobic on those who have a different view than them. You don't win followers that way, you win enemies.

 

[bad rider]

All right... third post,

Let me first begin by stating a fact; Homosexuality is natural. Just like Bi-sexual is, even heterosexual is natural. Before you go, "no way", consider this, in nature there are gay monkey's, gay cat's (I've got one), and more of them gay animals.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_animals (There are many many more facts but I'm to lazy to just type them more out)

Now, if you accept that fact, then it will become easier to understand this is really a discussion of nothing.

It is not the fact that the homosexuals, to wich I will refer in the future as just people, want more attention, it is more of the fact that the want to do normal thing like holding hands in the streets without people looking at them funny. However, the argument "Why be proud and go glittery all over the street" has in fact nothing to do with that. "I'm straight and you don't see me dressing all funny and drinking beer all over the place while hooting at the tits and ass?" argument doesn't hold ground because in fact.... you do... Nobody will say anything, because that's perceived normal boyish behaviour.

The same goes for the "Don't rub you're homosexuality in my face" argument.

*de-railing thread* I'm not sure whether homosexuality is natural, I haven't really read the research, but I'm sure it's debatable. You may find it in animals but it could be a psychological condition brought on from x such as animals who are are insecurely attached to there parents, we are designed to work by being securely attached (as you can see with graphs that measure social skills) but insecurely attached animals and people are found. So I'm not sure whether homosexuality is natural, but I don't know.....

P.S I am not homophobic I am just going to research the cause/s of homosexuality.

 

[Thanatos34]

All right... third post,

Let me first begin by stating a fact; Homosexuality is natural. Just like Bi-sexual is, even heterosexual is natural. Before you go, "no way", consider this, in nature there are gay monkey's, gay cat's (I've got one), and more of them gay animals.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_animals (There are many many more facts but I'm to lazy to just type them more out)

Now, if you accept that fact, then it will become easier to understand this is really a discussion of nothing.

It is not the fact that the homosexuals, to wich I will refer in the future as just people, want more attention, it is more of the fact that the want to do normal thing like holding hands in the streets without people looking at them funny. However, the argument "Why be proud and go glittery all over the street" has in fact nothing to do with that. "I'm straight and you don't see me dressing all funny and drinking beer all over the place while hooting at the tits and ass?" argument doesn't hold ground because in fact.... you do... Nobody will say anything, because that's perceived normal boyish behaviour.

The same goes for the "Don't rub you're homosexuality in my face" argument.

*de-railing thread* I'm not sure whether homosexuality is natural, I haven't really read the research, but I'm sure it's debatable. You may find it in animals but it could be a psychological condition brought on from x such as animals who are are insecurely attached to there parents, we are designed to work by being securely attached (as you can see with graphs that measure social skills) but insecurely attached animals and people are found. So I'm not sure whether homosexuality is natural, but I don't know.....

P.S I am not homophobic I am just going to research the cause/s of homosexuality.

I think, from what I recall from going through this in Biology, (long story, we got entirely side-tracked that day), was that there were currently two prevailing theories:
1) Homosexuality resulted from an imbalance in a certain gene, either less than, or more than normal, that led to the person desiring members of the same sex, (not a disease, more like a mutation), and
2) Homosexuality is linked to a specific gene that "they" have activated and heterosexuals do not. This, of course, leads to the debate over whether or not it is a choice. Considering that some homosexuals have decided they are no longer homosexual, I would say it leans towards it being a choice. Besides the fact that genes do not 100% determine what we will do, they merely give us a predisposition for something.

 

[Alex_P]

My point is if you call someone who merely disagrees with the gay lifestyle a homophobe, then you are certainly not going to win them over. They will immediately go on the defensive, and block out the rest of what you say. That is not the way to go about doing it.

I'll say it again: what the hell is "the gay lifestyle"?

-- Alex

 

[Thanatos34]

My point is if you call someone who merely disagrees with the gay lifestyle a homophobe, then you are certainly not going to win them over. They will immediately go on the defensive, and block out the rest of what you say. That is not the way to go about doing it.

I'll say it again: what the hell is "the gay lifestyle"?

-- Alex

It would depend on whatever retard is saying it. Most likely they mean the mere fact that someone is gay.

But you have to treat these people with kid-gloves. Go around insulting them, and you will make it all the harder for discrimination to finally be ended.