Do Gays Not Exist in Bioware's Star Wars?
- Thread starter John Funk
- Start date
1844 version: Why do conversations with these damned Negro's always boil down to 'Pay attention to us so we can ***** about being opressed' !?Hankage said:
Seriously, shut up.
You're mindset is disgusting.
"No skin off my back so why should I give a shit? I mean, who cares if they gays cant get married. I mean, my rights aren't being infringed, so who am I to care?"
...No...just...just no.avykins said:
The stupidity in this single post is absolutely astounding. Congratulations. You have disproved evolution.
I applaud you.
I mean, nothing as stupid as you are should be able to live this long.
Alright, and as a seperate post from that book I just wrote (which I doubt anyone will read) I wanted to make a side not to Cheeze_Pavilian:
Dude, normally when I get a quoted message from you I go "oh my god, here we go" because I'm at least expecting a decent arguement for the most part.
Hey, maybe it was my writing, but you seemed to miss some key points which makes responding to you rather difficult.
For example one does not put pheremones or whatever into food or whatever. Emitting and receiving them is part of your natural biology. Without them there is no sexual arousal really. See if you like take a guy's testicles off (of any sexual orientation) he simply doesn't feel sexual arousal, and won't be attracted to anyone in that way really. He might remember it to some extent, but isn't going to have a sex drive. The whole link between body chemistry and the brain isn't fully understood, but it exists.
At any rate, the point is that without the chemicals and responding to them, one simply does not get aroused. Someone who is homosexual is responding to the "system" of other men.
All male organizations and such are going to have gay men going at it without any real need for someone to dose the food or whatever. All they need is other men.
As far as prisons go, well let's just say that there are far more men terrified of the system for fear of getting buttraped (I think this scares a lot of people more than the prison sentences themselves do) than are going "Oh wow, I can get into prison and be in fudgepacker central".
I have heard arguements using male prisons to argue that all men are inherantly bi-sexual, however such arguements tend to overlook the trauma such things cause there and the sheer amount of fear that it generates. It's a debatable subject, having not been in prison, and having no desire to go there, I really have no first hand experience to provide you with. On paper it can be argued a lot of differant ways, depending on the political stance of the writer and what they want to convey. My father (who as I mentioned is a CO) currently works at a woman's prison, but has worked in a man's jail before (transferred to an easier job) his comments/theories seem to have changed over time back and forth.
As far as the Pheremone thing goes, it all gets down to one of the central debates about homosexuality. Is it a lifestyle choice, or are gays born that way? Truthfully if you listen to groups like ABIGAYLES their answer mostly depends on whichever answer gives them more political cred/acceptance at the time. If someone is less threatened by it being a lifestyle choice, then they go with that. If someone suggests that if it's a lifestyle choice they can simply be made to live another way, then it's all about how it's inherant and they were born that way. Some people are also threatened by the "I can't help it, I didn't ask to be this way" attitude as well. It also makes for some "great" movies to sell the gay experience as you know Tonight's Lifetime Exclusive Made For TV Premiere "young artist stuggles with the realization of being gay while chugging Java at a local Starbucks" tune in for "The Coffee Painter".
Really, you'll find the gay community will jump on the whole Phremone bandwagon until someone starts talking about treating homosexuality like it's a medical condition... then it's a lifestyle choice. When someone talks about CHOOSING to be that way and starts bringing up uncomfortable issues, as I said it's "Born that way". If neither answer satisfies someone... well then they must be a bigot: LEFT WING ATTACK! Raise the political correctness shields! Prepare for battle!
At any rate I'm tired and rambling, maybe I misread your post. I have no objection to argueing the point unless asked not to specifically by The Escapist (I have no intention of getting banned or suspended for being contreversial and not fitting in on what seems to be the general consensus here, and given the reaction of a "Red Guard"). Though admittedly I probably won't keep things going too long as I have no intention of keeping the thread anymore derailed.
Dude, normally when I get a quoted message from you I go "oh my god, here we go" because I'm at least expecting a decent arguement for the most part.
Hey, maybe it was my writing, but you seemed to miss some key points which makes responding to you rather difficult.
For example one does not put pheremones or whatever into food or whatever. Emitting and receiving them is part of your natural biology. Without them there is no sexual arousal really. See if you like take a guy's testicles off (of any sexual orientation) he simply doesn't feel sexual arousal, and won't be attracted to anyone in that way really. He might remember it to some extent, but isn't going to have a sex drive. The whole link between body chemistry and the brain isn't fully understood, but it exists.
At any rate, the point is that without the chemicals and responding to them, one simply does not get aroused. Someone who is homosexual is responding to the "system" of other men.
All male organizations and such are going to have gay men going at it without any real need for someone to dose the food or whatever. All they need is other men.
As far as prisons go, well let's just say that there are far more men terrified of the system for fear of getting buttraped (I think this scares a lot of people more than the prison sentences themselves do) than are going "Oh wow, I can get into prison and be in fudgepacker central".
I have heard arguements using male prisons to argue that all men are inherantly bi-sexual, however such arguements tend to overlook the trauma such things cause there and the sheer amount of fear that it generates. It's a debatable subject, having not been in prison, and having no desire to go there, I really have no first hand experience to provide you with. On paper it can be argued a lot of differant ways, depending on the political stance of the writer and what they want to convey. My father (who as I mentioned is a CO) currently works at a woman's prison, but has worked in a man's jail before (transferred to an easier job) his comments/theories seem to have changed over time back and forth.
As far as the Pheremone thing goes, it all gets down to one of the central debates about homosexuality. Is it a lifestyle choice, or are gays born that way? Truthfully if you listen to groups like ABIGAYLES their answer mostly depends on whichever answer gives them more political cred/acceptance at the time. If someone is less threatened by it being a lifestyle choice, then they go with that. If someone suggests that if it's a lifestyle choice they can simply be made to live another way, then it's all about how it's inherant and they were born that way. Some people are also threatened by the "I can't help it, I didn't ask to be this way" attitude as well. It also makes for some "great" movies to sell the gay experience as you know Tonight's Lifetime Exclusive Made For TV Premiere "young artist stuggles with the realization of being gay while chugging Java at a local Starbucks" tune in for "The Coffee Painter".
Really, you'll find the gay community will jump on the whole Phremone bandwagon until someone starts talking about treating homosexuality like it's a medical condition... then it's a lifestyle choice. When someone talks about CHOOSING to be that way and starts bringing up uncomfortable issues, as I said it's "Born that way". If neither answer satisfies someone... well then they must be a bigot: LEFT WING ATTACK! Raise the political correctness shields! Prepare for battle!
At any rate I'm tired and rambling, maybe I misread your post. I have no objection to argueing the point unless asked not to specifically by The Escapist (I have no intention of getting banned or suspended for being contreversial and not fitting in on what seems to be the general consensus here, and given the reaction of a "Red Guard"). Though admittedly I probably won't keep things going too long as I have no intention of keeping the thread anymore derailed.
A forum moderator does not represent the entire games company, or indeed the developers at all. Forums are full of people who make mistakes or are simply idiots, TOR forums would be no different. Bioware has done the whole relationship thing okay in their games so far (in my opinion), and there's little reason to think they'll mess it up this time around.
What am I supposed to think, when you write stuff like "Within the sphere of Hetero or Lesbian relationships I'm a confessed pervert"? You're kinda putting yourself in the box for me, y'know.Therumancer said:
Pedophiles are attracted to "pre-sexual humans". Most male pedophiles aren't homosexual with other adults. Many pedophiles lack a functional teleiophilic (attracted-to-adults) sexual orientation entirely.Therumancer said:
I understand how your experiences lead to your current opinion, but you're still committing a deep, deep category error here. This isn't "left-wing propaganda" talking. Gay-identified men aren't the primary cause of male-male child sexual abuse.
-- Alex
Well Cainx, part of my point in all of that rambling is that I believe I've come to a pretty fair conclusion other than what happened to me based on experience rather than one isolated incident as much as the very fact that it happened bugs me.
When you get down to it, you'll find a lot of gays are pretty apologetic when they hear about things like that and want to prove that not all of them are bad, however things inevitably happen that convince me that while there might be a few good gay men out there, they are the exception rather than the rule. Basically that most are pedophilles at least latently (it comes down to oppertunities) and those that are not are the exception.
I brought up specifics like NAMBLA and how the security department I was part of was instructed to act in cases of possible child abuse because of fear of that organization because it made an impression on me. See casino security is mostly a dog and pony show in of itself, but the way we received the order basically amounted to the fact that if we rreported something like that, or stepped in to stop something short of a kid being raped in the middle of a public hallway, we were not going to be backed up, and the Tribe (and Tribal PD) were not going to back us up. The idea being that it was easier for them to have a kid molested and fire a security officer or two for "not doing anything" (as I said "hold the uniform up, take the blame for what goes wrong" for the most part) than it is for Security, Tribal, or the on site State Police unit to get involved and then have to deal with the resulting lawsuit or legal combat expenses when NAMBLA came after them for every little thing that they would with their own high powered lawyers.
That incident made an impression on me, because it occured to me that if there are enough people behind a group like that, to make it THAT powerful we can't be dealing with a tiny fringe. I mean honestly, when your worried about security simply creating an incident (calling supervisors, actual police units, etc...) that says a lot. Especially when the group doing the worrying is about as above the law for all intents and purposes as you get outside of a James Bond movie (ie going after a Tribal organization with that much money in their back yard, when the state is getting a massive amount of money via a cut of the take is more or less impossible... I could say more about it including what happened when *I* lost my job before I went for disabillity but that's a whole differant subject).
Another too long post, but what I'm saying is that while what happened to me might taint my perspective somewhat, I'd like to think I'm clear of it for the most part. My attitude has been influanced by things like the above, and other incidents (some of which I mentioned) over a long period of time.
>>>----Therumancer--->
When you get down to it, you'll find a lot of gays are pretty apologetic when they hear about things like that and want to prove that not all of them are bad, however things inevitably happen that convince me that while there might be a few good gay men out there, they are the exception rather than the rule. Basically that most are pedophilles at least latently (it comes down to oppertunities) and those that are not are the exception.
I brought up specifics like NAMBLA and how the security department I was part of was instructed to act in cases of possible child abuse because of fear of that organization because it made an impression on me. See casino security is mostly a dog and pony show in of itself, but the way we received the order basically amounted to the fact that if we rreported something like that, or stepped in to stop something short of a kid being raped in the middle of a public hallway, we were not going to be backed up, and the Tribe (and Tribal PD) were not going to back us up. The idea being that it was easier for them to have a kid molested and fire a security officer or two for "not doing anything" (as I said "hold the uniform up, take the blame for what goes wrong" for the most part) than it is for Security, Tribal, or the on site State Police unit to get involved and then have to deal with the resulting lawsuit or legal combat expenses when NAMBLA came after them for every little thing that they would with their own high powered lawyers.
That incident made an impression on me, because it occured to me that if there are enough people behind a group like that, to make it THAT powerful we can't be dealing with a tiny fringe. I mean honestly, when your worried about security simply creating an incident (calling supervisors, actual police units, etc...) that says a lot. Especially when the group doing the worrying is about as above the law for all intents and purposes as you get outside of a James Bond movie (ie going after a Tribal organization with that much money in their back yard, when the state is getting a massive amount of money via a cut of the take is more or less impossible... I could say more about it including what happened when *I* lost my job before I went for disabillity but that's a whole differant subject).
Another too long post, but what I'm saying is that while what happened to me might taint my perspective somewhat, I'd like to think I'm clear of it for the most part. My attitude has been influanced by things like the above, and other incidents (some of which I mentioned) over a long period of time.
>>>----Therumancer--->
Because if you shout loud enough, someone's bound to hear. If something makes you uncomfortable, you're bound to do something about it, and then more people will find out, ect, ect.Hankage said:
A comment concerning Therumancer; the impression I get is that he's working from information twenty years old. As such, I'm going to ask him to find sources to back up his claims, preferably peer-reviewed.
I may not be able to change your mind, but I'm sure I can convince you that you may be wrong. Which is all I need to do.
Apologies Abound
Juhani was pretty obviously gay in KotOR. As for a "gay option" in the romance subplots... does it matter? Can't you just use your imagination to fill in what happens after the credits roll? They had gay romance subplots in Jade Empire and Mass Effect, so I'm guessing they just didn't think there was such a demand for it back then.
Who bloody fucking cares about this?!
Far as we know the whole Juhani thing was a glitch, and that is the only occurrence of same-sex relationships in Star Wars. EVER. Why is it suddenly a big deal now?
Far as we know the whole Juhani thing was a glitch, and that is the only occurrence of same-sex relationships in Star Wars. EVER. Why is it suddenly a big deal now?