Homosexuality in Golarion

[Hakken]

The iconic cleric is gay? I was thinking it was going to be the wizard or possibly the rogue being bisexual. The comics seemed to have the rogue flirting with everyone.

[Amaranthine Witch]

That's because she probably IS bisexual (or just flirty). Kyra being a lesbian, in no way negates the potential LGBTness of other iconics (I'm still waiting for the male gay one).

[Liz Courts]

Removed a lot of off-topic posts and their replies. Continuing to insult and treat other posters with derision is not going to be tolerated—do not do it on these messageboards.

[Gorbacz]

Kajehase wrote:

Try putting a cat in a bag and see if it agrees with you. ;)

The bag agrees. *CHOMP*

[Kittyburger]

Hakken wrote:

The iconic cleric is gay? I was thinking it was going to be the wizard or possibly the rogue being bisexual. The comics seemed to have the rogue flirting with everyone.

Merisiel flirts with Kyra A LOT. :) I think she's said she's something like 75% attracted to women (in the "Ask Merisiel" thread), and particularly to Kyra.

[Beckett]

Hakken wrote:

The iconic cleric is gay? I was thinking it was going to be the wizard or possibly the rogue being bisexual. The comics seemed to have the rogue flirting with everyone.

Yah, the Cleric is gay, ( want to say revealed in issue 1 through a snap shot of the past), and the Rogue is "sort of" bisexual, but not really, (not sure what that means). There is also supposed to be a male gay iconic, and one that has switched gender (um, um paladin).

[Beckett]

And my posts are gone.

[Cori Marie]

Kyra's reveal was in issue 5, and was done very well in one of her memories as she was being charmed.

[LazarX]

TanithT wrote:

What generally goes along with monarchies and Western marriage? Helpless princess tropes, women as objects and possessions, patrilineal inheritance, sex negativity, sex shaming, a default assumption that everyone who matters is white and male and heterosexual, and an economy and general standard of living shaped in the absence of industry and technology. Except that magic of a level indistinguishable from technology DOES exist, you said so, and no one has bothered to do any serious thinking about what that would actually leave the society and economy looking like.

Save that magic to that level does not exist as a default condition in any of the published worlds save Eberron. Magic is still a restricted and uncommon to rare commodity and does not really impact the lifestyle of the common man, especially given that most of it is battle magic. However just because part of the package is true, doesn't mean that every single other part must follow. In our own history, we've had strong warrior queeens, at least one very strong crossdressing female Pharaoh. And not every "white culture" has been as hung up on sex as the British and American.

[thejeff]

LazarX wrote:

TanithT wrote:

What generally goes along with monarchies and Western marriage? Helpless princess tropes, women as objects and possessions, patrilineal inheritance, sex negativity, sex shaming, a default assumption that everyone who matters is white and male and heterosexual, and an economy and general standard of living shaped in the absence of industry and technology. Except that magic of a level indistinguishable from technology DOES exist, you said so, and no one has bothered to do any serious thinking about what that would actually leave the society and economy looking like.

Save that magic to that level does not exist as a default condition in any of the published worlds save Eberron. Magic is still a restricted and uncommon to rare commodity and does not really impact the lifestyle of the common man, especially given that most of it is battle magic. However just because part of the package is true, doesn't mean that every single other part must follow. In our own history, we've had strong warrior queeens, at least one very strong crossdressing female Pharaoh. And not every "white culture" has been as hung up on sex as the British and American.

It's hard to say, exactly how much effect magic has had. At first glance, it seems you're right, most people don't have casual access to magic, even on the low level. OTOH, the standard of living and of personal freedom in most FRPG worlds, including Golarion, is far above most of civilized history. The common people aren't anywhere near as bad off as they were in medieval Europe or in many other regions around the world. 99% of the population isn't doing subsistence farming, bound to the land and the whims of their lord with little to no hope of ever a change in their station, for themselves or for their children. All but the most evil and repressive regimes are pretty nice by historical standards. Small villages of free-holders seem common in most places.

Women are liberated, even by today's standards. That suggests, based on biology, that they either have some fairly reliable means of birth control and/or the ability to provide for themselves and any children.

All of this might be possible in a low tech economy without magic, but magic makes it more plausible. Simply assuming that the average village priest or hedge mage has some useful spells/rituals that aren't in the rules precisely because they're not battle/adventuring magic goes a long way.
A little information from the gods about germ theory & sanitation helps, even without direct magic. As would information about farming practices.

[Andrew R]

Gorbacz wrote:

Andrew R wrote:

I stick with Schrodinger's Orientation. Could be any unless it is somehow relevant. Is the inn keeper gay or straight? Both and neither unless his wife/child or male lover have a reason to exist. Is the bard coming onto the male or female PC? the one that makes the most sense and makes themselves the "target"

Do you stick with Schordinger's gender, Schrodinger's skin color, Schrodinger's hair color as well?

Can you tell if every person is gay or straight by just looking at them? For things like religion etc that you cannot tell by appearance yes they get the same treatment. And yes if a physical appearance is not important for shopkeeper #543 i do not bother unless they want to open the box

[thejeff]

TanithT wrote:

What generally goes along with monarchies and Western marriage? Helpless princess tropes, women as objects and possessions, patrilineal inheritance, sex negativity, sex shaming, a default assumption that everyone who matters is white and male and heterosexual, and an economy and general standard of living shaped in the absence of industry and technology. Except that magic of a level indistinguishable from technology DOES exist, you said so, and no one has bothered to do any serious thinking about what that would actually leave the society and economy looking like.

Actually people have done a lot of serious thinking about that. The trouble is the conclusions they come to are that it wouldn't look much like a traditional fantasy world. Eberron is probably the closest well-known RPG approach.

But there are reasons people prefer traditional fantasy worlds: like Earth history, whether European or other cultures, but with magic and monsters and a lot of the icky bits stripped away. We're not playing in a simulation of what would a world really be like with magic. We're playing in variations of our cultural myths. They resonate in ways that a more realistic fantasy doesn't.

Not saying the more realistic approach can't be fun from time to time, but it's never going to have the appeal that the more traditional approach does. Which leaves us trying to reconcile or eliminate the bits we don't like with the bits we do. Monarchies with all the patriarchy crap. Nobility with all the classist crap. You'll notice in Golarion, along with equality for women, we also have a lack of the worst elements of the class system. Slaves, yes, but not the vast majority of serfs/thralls or whatever label you attach to the lowest caste of near slaves.

[3.5 Loyalist]

I like your summations, "We're playing in variations of our cultural myths. They resonate in ways that a more realistic fantasy doesn't".

Which explains why there is so much argument--competing and clashing cultural myths in a setting, or the mythic meeting more of the modern (I have never got on board with steampunk fantasy, but I don't mind mecha and pacific rim).

Whose myth is it anyway (or whose myth is this mythic place being made into) is always going to lead to a lot of argument. Sometimes fun, sometimes infuriating.

[Tirisfal]

Did anyone say that "shopkeeper #543" needs to be gay?

No.

Stop using hyperbolic examples to prove your point - its silly.

I keep hearing that the characters need to have a story reason to be gay - guess what? Irabeth and her wife do have reasons that develop their characters. Why don't you try starting there before attempting to conquer some fake concept such as "should I tell ALL of my players that an NPC is gay????! I don't want that!!!".

It is included for these characters in their backstories to flesh them out for the GMs; unless the PCs ask the characters directly, there is no storyline reason why the PCs should ever have to find out.

[3.5 Loyalist]

Mmmm yeah, sometimes you want it to be obvious, sometimes it can be so hidden they are really unlikely to find out.

I'm running a game set in a game at the moment, with a range of people in it from over ten years in the future, so yeah, some are gay. Some are very clear about that fact, especially when there are no moral police in the server (Sword art game). One lost a gay love interest recently to a foe, and then the pc died to a trap. Really tragic.

I threw in a bi village tyrant in one game. They spent so much time messing with her, burning down her holdings and killing her zombies they never found the rest of her details out. She was so furious at them, and was also maneuvered into losing a political struggle, that she was never going to sleep with this or that from the party, lol.

[Tirisfal]

I have no clue what you're talking about sometimes, Loyalist.

[3.5 Loyalist]

:/
For gay, lesbian or bi characters, sometimes a dm can make it obvious, and sometimes it can be so hidden that the players are really unlikely to find out.

Shopkeeper 543 might be gay, but it also may be hard to determine, or not come up.

I mean, they could check out the barbarian's loincloth and exclaim "those are some large onions you are carrying around in your sack", but it won't be that frank all the time. :)

[thejeff]

3.5 Loyalist wrote:

:/

For gay, lesbian or bi characters, sometimes a dm can make it obvious, and sometimes it can be so hidden that the players are really unlikely to find out.

Shopkeeper 543 might be gay, but it also may be hard to determine, or not come up.

I mean, they could check out the barbarian's loincloth and exclaim "those are some large onions you are carrying around in your sack", but it won't be that frank all the time. :)

You mean like every time Paizo has used a LGBT character in the setting? Where it's never been that frank or at least not crass? Just "Oh, here's this character and her wife." Or "If anyone cares to look closely, the paladin has a relationship with this other guy."

[HangarFlying]

Cori Marie wrote:

Kyra's reveal was in issue 5, and was done very well in one of her memories as she was being charmed.

Wait...what?

*Runs off to re-read #5*

Huh, I don't remember that the first time I read it. Either:

A) I just skimmed through the issue,
B) flat out didn't read the issue, or
C) read it, wasn't phased by it, and just forgot about it.

I'm thinking C because I do remember the last couple of pages.