So a while back there was a thread about whether the dwarven goddess of marriage was homophobic. It went as about as one expects but it got me thinking and I had a thought. I have those sometimes ;) Anyway, the thought occurred to me: What if dwarves, while not asexual, only breed for reproduction because they have the lowest urge amongst the common races? What if they only marry and reproduce for clan and bloodline reasons and that's it?
This would explain or contribute to why they don't get along or seem confused by other races. The other races spend so much time and energy focusing on getting some and it seems strange and unproductive to them. This would particularity add to their stand offish relationship with elves who got at it like rabbits.
Thoughts?
| 14 people marked this as a favorite. |
Dwarves reproduce by planting cuttings from their beards. To improve the dwarf sproutlings' viability, a papa dwarf will graft their beard cutting to a heartier "rootstalk" beard cutting from a "mama" dwarf. The best beards suitable for rootstalk cuttings are so popular, these mama dwarves will pluck their facial hair bald to provide enough rootstalk for the clans.
Also, dwarves only like beer because it is great for killing voracious slugs.
I just thought a lack of sexual interest would be an interesting twist rather than the traditional "Stuffiness" that is often attributed to dwarves.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What if dwarves, while not asexual, only breed for reproduction because they have the lowest urge amongst the common races? What if they only marry and reproduce for clan and bloodline reasons and that's it?
I might not be understanding how this resolves the question, but how does having "the lowest urge amongst the common races" mean that all dwarves must be heterosexual? How would this make them not homophobic (or heterosexist)?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
as long as they use axes and talk in a Scottish accent I do not care how they get down, why they get down or who they get down with
What if dwarves, while not asexual, only breed for reproduction because they have the lowest urge amongst the common races? What if they only marry and reproduce for clan and bloodline reasons and that's it?I might not be understanding how this resolves the question, but how does having "the lowest urge amongst the common races" mean that all dwarves must be heterosexual? How would this make them not homophobic (or heterosexist)?Because I'd assume their sex drive was so low they'd only be interested in mating for actual reproductive purposes. "No point in goin' to all that bother if you aren't gonna get babies out of it."
Not heterosexual, but very close to asexual. They'll do their duty to the clan, but other than that have no interest in sex.They wouldn't be so much homophobic as just completely different. A human homosexual would seem weird and wrong to them, but not much more so than heterosexual human.
Kind of a neat concept, but a little too weird for common use.
This is pretty much what I was going for Annabel.
How would it be too weird?
Have you looked at Dwarves? Well, they looked at one another, and since they can't tell their men from their women, they probably reproduce only to swell their numbers and with the least possible contact.
My dwarven skirmisher gets into arguments about his human companions' constant copulation. Our leader is now married with an infant daughter, but we're miles away doing the adventuring thing while his wife is home raising their child without him. He keeps telling them the dwarven way is best. You do your adventuring, mature, and then find yourself a mate and settle down for the rest of your days. Otherwise you're shirking your duty to your partner and children. They don't put much credence to his lectures. Then again, he's got a Charisma of 6, so that doesn't help.
Having dwarves as asexual creatures is an interesting slant on things, I'll give you that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is pretty much what I was going for Annabel.What if dwarves, while not asexual, only breed for reproduction because they have the lowest urge amongst the common races? What if they only marry and reproduce for clan and bloodline reasons and that's it?I might not be understanding how this resolves the question, but how does having "the lowest urge amongst the common races" mean that all dwarves must be heterosexual? How would this make them not homophobic (or heterosexist)?Because I'd assume their sex drive was so low they'd only be interested in mating for actual reproductive purposes. "No point in goin' to all that bother if you aren't gonna get babies out of it."
Not heterosexual, but very close to asexual. They'll do their duty to the clan, but other than that have no interest in sex.They wouldn't be so much homophobic as just completely different. A human homosexual would seem weird and wrong to them, but not much more so than heterosexual human.
Kind of a neat concept, but a little too weird for common use.
I think that would still be heterosexist and homophobic. Just because they've been conceptualized as exclusively heterosexual to explain heterosexism/homophobia doesn't make heterosexism/homophobia disappear.
Consider it from the perspective of a dwarf who is in romance with another dwarf of the same gender. For her, the organization of dwarf society around exclusive, business-like heterosexual marriages would be alienating: it would be a society of heterosexism.
Have you looked at Dwarves? Well, they looked at one another, and since they can't tell their men from their women, they probably reproduce only to swell their numbers and with the least possible contact.
What's wrong with androgyny?
I think that would still be heterosexist and homophobic. Just because they've been conceptualized as exclusively heterosexual to explain heterosexism/homophobia doesn't make heterosexism/homophobia disappear.
Consider it from the perspective of a dwarf who is in romance with another dwarf of the same gender. For her, the organization of dwarf society around exclusive, business-like heterosexual marriages would be alienating: it would be a society of heterosexism.
Except it's not the "organization of dwarf society", it's their natural state.
If this hypothetical dwarf wanted to have sex with this other dwarf of the same gender, it would be considered perversion, but hardly more so than wanting to have sex at all would be.
What makes this their "natural state" and not a characteristics of their society? What do you even mean by "natural state"? How is something even understood as a "perversion" if it isn't organized around social notions of rightness and wrongness?
Have you looked at Dwarves? Well, they looked at one another, and since they can't tell their men from their women, they probably reproduce only to swell their numbers and with the least possible contact.
So your explanation of dwarven heterosexism is that you cannot imagine why a woman would want to have sex with another woman or a man would want to have sex with another man?
What makes this their "natural state" and not a characteristics of their society? What do you even mean by "natural state"? How is something even understood as a "perversion" if it isn't organized around social notions of rightness and wrongness?I think that would still be heterosexist and homophobic. Just because they've been conceptualized as exclusively heterosexual to explain heterosexism/homophobia doesn't make heterosexism/homophobia disappear.
Consider it from the perspective of a dwarf who is in romance with another dwarf of the same gender. For her, the organization of dwarf society around exclusive, business-like heterosexual marriages would be alienating: it would be a society of heterosexism.
Except it's not the "organization of dwarf society", it's their natural state.
If this hypothetical dwarf wanted to have sex with this other dwarf of the same gender, it would be considered perversion, but hardly more so than wanting to have sex at all would be.
Me.:)
I made it up. (Or actually The NPC did and I took it and ran with it.)
What if dwarves, while not asexual, only breed for reproduction because they have the lowest urge amongst the common races? What if they only marry and reproduce for clan and bloodline reasons and that's it?
This would explain or contribute to why they don't get along or seem confused by other races. The other races spend so much time and energy focusing on getting some and it seems strange and unproductive to them. This would particularity add to their stand offish relationship with elves who got at it like rabbits.
I'm assuming that "not asexual" but "the lowest urge" referred to actual biological traits.
If it was entirely a cultural thing it would be a horribly sexually repressed culture.
Okay....
Well, I posit the existence of two dwarven women who are deeply and intimately in love and want to get married. If they were two dwarves of opposite sex, they would be allowed such an arrangement, because they would be behaving according to the structure of traditional dwarven marriage. It would be beneficial, in terms of agreeing by the usual standards necessary for marriage contracts. How is the dwarven view that their love is a "perversion" not evidence of heterosexism or homophobia?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's worth pointing out that people in the real world have posited that humans are biologically heterosexual, that heterosexual sexual desire is biologically determined. You probably shouldn't take your descriptions of dwarves straight from real world homophobic talking points (except with "human" swapped out for "dwarf"). It might be a little off-putting to any queer people at your table.
Also, if someone at your table wants to play a bisexual dwarf, don't be an ass and tell them no.
|
I ran a world where dwarves naturally had a high percentage of male to female births. As a result male homosexuality was high, as were bachelor uncles and it explained the preponderance of male dwarven adventurers versus female. Monogamy was psycho heavy and the drive for devotion was poured into crafting for those who couldn't find wives.
I believe this interpretation was the one revealed in The Best of Dragon Magazine Volume III's article - The Dwarven Point of View, written by Roger E. Moore - and is therefore the dwarven theory I have regarded as canon ever since.
I ran a world where dwarves naturally had a high percentage of male to female births. As a result male homosexuality was high, as were bachelor uncles and it explained the preponderance of male dwarven adventurers versus female. Monogamy was psycho heavy and the drive for devotion was poured into crafting for those who couldn't find wives.I believe this interpretation was the one revealed in The Best of Dragon Magazine Volume III's article - The Dwarven Point of View, written by Roger E. Moore - and is therefore the dwarven theory I have regarded as canon ever since.
Thanks for the reference, it was a pretty interesting read. Now I know the proper (and improper) ways to consecrate a dead dwarf.
Though it's worth noting that I didn't see any mention of queer dwaves in Moore's article. It was clearly implied that all dwarves are heterosexual, seeing as dwarves who don't secure heterosexual marriages lead lives concerned with more material things.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Okay....Well, I posit the existence of two dwarven women who are deeply and intimately in love and want to get married. If they were two dwarves of opposite sex, they would be allowed such an arrangement, because they would be behaving according to the structure of traditional dwarven marriage. It would be beneficial, in terms of agreeing by the usual standards necessary for marriage contracts. How is the dwarven view that their love is a "perversion" not evidence of heterosexism or homophobia?
I don't know. I'd have to spend a bit more time than the few minutes I've spent writing up these posts to get a better idea of their culture. I'd have to think about whether the institution of marriage makes any sense. Whether it really is, unlike in modern human society, just a contract to raise children. Or if it's even that. What "deeply and intimately in love" means in a race without a sex drive. Whether it's expected to be tied to the child raising activity or not.
Their love may or may not be a perversion, depending on whether you're including sexual desire. If you're not, it wouldn't be. If you are, it would, but it would also be if it was an opposite sex couple.
I'd also have to try to make a guess at how much you're just pushing human sexual and relationship patterns onto a race that is intended to think and feel very differently.
The two women dwarfs explicitly stated, (in dwarven) that they were deeply in love. "Deeply" having special meaning to dwarves, who value notions of depth because they live underground.
They do have sex, and that sex is lesbian dwarf sex. And this is being labeled a perversion.
I whole-heartedly agree with them: they are suffering under a sex-negative, heterosexist society. The sex-negativity coming from the clearly restrictive social norms surrounding sexuality. And the heterosexism (homophobia) coming from the fact that the only socially legitimated sexual acts are allowed under the ostensibly "natural" purposes of "breeding."
It's really hard for me to think of someone as bisexual when the attitude towards sex is as an unpleasant task to get over with so you can have the fun of raising children.
Glad to have your opinion on what it takes to be bisexual. Real great of you to define other people's identities for them.
And, not to detour too far into modern politics, but unless I missed something the current homophobe's common argument is that sexual orientation is a choice while the gay rights people mostly claim it's biologically determined. I'm hardly using homophobic talking points here.
It's basically the natural law argument against same-sex sexual behavior. I.e. the argument that heterosexuality is natural, normal, biological, and moral. Whereas your explanation for dwarves was that for them, heterosexuality is natural, normal, biological. It's exactly homophobic talking points, except that you left the "and moral" part to be silently echoed in the reader's mind.
Regardless, I'm not talking about humans. I'm postulating a different fantasy species, with a very different sexual/relationship/parenting pattern than humans do. Taking one of the biggest human drives out of the picture entirely.
Yeah I don't buy this. You're appealing to real-world ideas about sexuality to explain dwarves, so of course anyone looking at them is going to see a reflection of the real world. Just stating that they aren't derivative of humans doesn't magically make it so.
Not surprising, given that it was written in the early 80s. Gaming wasn't particularly progressive back then.
Or now...
Honestly depending on the setting Dwarves might not even have gender
I've seen at least three versions of Dwarves where they are all essentially Male, and only because of the beards and smell.
In two of those they carve their people fully grown out of rock and in the other they hatch from eggs sprinkled with fairy dust (thank you ABC for that one)
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Towns of the Inner Sea has Agrit Staginsdar and Sara Morninghawk, an (awesome) dwarf wizard/Shoanti half-orc blacksmith lesbian couple living in Trunau.
IIRC, Agrit was under some pressure to continue her family line, but no one stopped her from marrying who she wanted.
I think we all might want to take a few chill pills here (chillaxitives?) No one's trying to marginalize anyone's sexuality, we're just talking about the hypothetical sexual nature of a fantasy race of humanoids.
Annabel. This idea wasn't supposed to be solution to anything. It was simply caused by the previous discussion.
An it goes down to desire. They don't have it so when someone has it for which ever chromosome pair they want it elicits a Question Mark Face.
What's wrong with androgyny?
So your explanation of dwarven heterosexism is that you cannot imagine why a woman would want to have sex with another woman or a man would want to have sex with another man?
Guys, your passive-aggressive attitude is going to gain mythic tiers.
Not every joke means that someone would shoot down homosexuals or whatever.Relax.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think the Paizo fan base has put far more thought and creativity into the Dwarves than any of the Paizo writers have. Golarion dwarves at the moment drink beer, fight orcs, practice smithing. That's it. They get the same sprinkling of happy, healthy homosexual relationships that all the other Golarion races get in adventure paths and scenarios but there is no effort to add any extra thought or complexity to their society as a whole. When the biggest rebellion is 'These sand dwarves don't have beards!!!' you know there's not much being done.
Perhaps this is because the dwarves, as a fictional race, are the property of a subtype of real life player who likes drinking beer, power-attacking orcs and crafting weaponry? To begin writing, questioning and adding 'otherness' to their family structure or sexual behaviour would make a major player type group aghast. It'd be akin to saying the smurfs (yes I did use this example to get the cool avvie) practise smurf-to-vegetable insemination. I don't think the kids would like it. You can have your speculative societies, but for heaven's sake, don't speculate there!
Any attempts to add further complexity to the 'stereotype race' will go unheeded.
|
To attempt not to derail this conversation any further. I am going to sum up what I believe your idea is before responding. Your idea is that dwarves have no biological interest in sex whatsoever. Literally, the only sex that happens is a function of duty to clan/king/whatever to propagate their species.
Just that part is kind of an interesting idea, but three questions: One, how did they evolve to this point? Do they have a mating season (like a wild animal, or a Vulcan) during which they breed? Otherwise I fail to see how they would have survived a generation or so. Something needs to explain that part.
Two, why don't they just use magic and skip the sex part completely?
Three, wouldn't that actually imply a non hetero-normative culture? For example, there are two ways to take this idea, one is that romantic love (still possible, without sex) is what leads to all matches. If that were the case, there seems little reason to exclude any two people from entering into a relationship. In that instance, there would probably be less aversion to relationships with other races either (though the other race might find it off-putting). At the opposite extreme would be the idea that no romantic love exists (or is suppressed by the culture), in that situation, if I need to form an alliance between my clan and that clan, and we only have daughters, wouldn't I just arrange a marriage between them? I'm assuming in this variant that the only reason to have a marriage is for some other reason.
The two women dwarfs explicitly stated, (in dwarven) that they were deeply in love. "Deeply" having special meaning to dwarves, who value notions of depth because they live underground.They do have sex, and that sex is lesbian dwarf sex. And this is being labeled a perversion.
I whole-heartedly agree with them: they are suffering under a sex-negative, heterosexist society. The sex-negativity coming from the clearly restrictive social norms surrounding sexuality. And the heterosexism (homophobia) coming from the fact that the only socially legitimated sexual acts are allowed under the ostensibly "natural" purposes of "breeding."
OK. You are clearly rejecting the theoretical premise of this thought experiment: that dwarves lack interest in sex.
You seem to be assuming that dwarves really must have the same variety and intensity of sexual desire that real humans do, but that it's being socially repressed.
As such, I wouldn't use this approach to dwarves in a game with you. (Or probably at all. It's a neat idea, but I'm not really sure where to go with it.)
I'm actually rejecting the premise that "sex activity" is something that is biologically determined.
There seems to be this underlying notion that feelings of "disgust" or ideas about "perversion" are somehow built into human(oid) biology: that whenever dwarf feels disgusted by these two women, that disgust is due to some sort of "natural" (and moral") wrongness of their sexual relations.
And it is you who are assuming that dwarves have a more narrow range of sexual desire than humans.... Or is it that we are both making all of this up on the fly because it is all made up?
I was just asserting that there will be dwarves (maybe even a sexual minority of them) who don't fit normative dwarven standards, and thus will face marginalization because of their sexuality....
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Have you looked at Dwarves? Well, they looked at one another, and since they can't tell their men from their women, they probably reproduce only to swell their numbers and with the least possible contact.What's wrong with androgyny?Have you looked at Dwarves?...So your explanation of dwarven heterosexism is that you cannot imagine why a woman would want to have sex with another woman or a man would want to have sex with another man?Guys, your passive-aggressive attitude is going to gain mythic tiers.
Not every joke means that someone would shoot down homosexuals or whatever.
Relax.
I think you understand that the only humor to be found in your "joke" was as the expense of gay men and lesbians. Good dodge though.
|
|
Not surprising, given that it was written in the early 80s. Gaming wasn't particularly progressive back then.I ran a world where dwarves naturally had a high percentage of male to female births. As a result male homosexuality was high, as were bachelor uncles and it explained the preponderance of male dwarven adventurers versus female. Monogamy was psycho heavy and the drive for devotion was poured into crafting for those who couldn't find wives.I believe this interpretation was the one revealed in The Best of Dragon Magazine Volume III's article - The Dwarven Point of View, written by Roger E. Moore - and is therefore the dwarven theory I have regarded as canon ever since.Thanks for the reference, it was a pretty interesting read. Now I know the proper (and improper) ways to consecrate a dead dwarf.
Though it's worth noting that I didn't see any mention of queer dwaves in Moore's article. It was clearly implied that all dwarves are heterosexual, seeing as dwarves who don't secure heterosexual marriages lead lives concerned with more material things.
Correct. It was more the fact that Dwarves are born 2:1 male:female, though the impact that would have on their society can easily be inferred by the reader - growing up gay in the early 80s, one read a lot between the lines, and took their inspiration and role models from wherever they could find them.
The two women dwarfs explicitly stated, (in dwarven) that they were deeply in love. "Deeply" having special meaning to dwarves, who value notions of depth because they live underground.They do have sex, and that sex is lesbian dwarf sex. And this is being labeled a perversion.
I whole-heartedly agree with them: they are suffering under a sex-negative, heterosexist society. The sex-negativity coming from the clearly restrictive social norms surrounding sexuality. And the heterosexism (homophobia) coming from the fact that the only socially legitimated sexual acts are allowed under the ostensibly "natural" purposes of "breeding."
OK. You are clearly rejecting the theoretical premise of this thought experiment: that dwarves lack interest in sex.
You seem to be assuming that dwarves really must have the same variety and intensity of sexual desire that real humans do, but that it's being socially repressed.
As such, I wouldn't use this approach to dwarves in a game with you. (Or probably at all. It's a neat idea, but I'm not really sure where to go with it.)I'm actually rejecting the premise that "sex activity" is something that is biologically determined.
There seems to be this underlying notion that feelings of "disgust" or ideas about "perversion" are somehow built into human(oid) biology: that whenever dwarf feels disgusted by these two women, that disgust is due to some sort of "natural" (and moral") wrongness of their sexual relations.
And it is you who are assuming that dwarves have a more narrow range of sexual desire than humans.... Or is it that we are both making all of this up on the fly because it is all made up?
I was just asserting that there will be dwarves (maybe even a sexual minority of them) who don't fit normative dwarven standards, and thus will face marginalization because of their sexuality....
Sooo... you reject asexuality?
The problem with the dwarf scenario isn't the asexuality. It's, as rooboy said, that they're unlikely to have evolved to that stage (asexuality is the norm) or been created that way, and conflating asexuality with aromanticity.
I think you understand that the only humor to be found in your "joke" was as the expense of gay men and lesbians. Good dodge though.Have you looked at Dwarves? Well, they looked at one another, and since they can't tell their men from their women, they probably reproduce only to swell their numbers and with the least possible contact.What's wrong with androgyny?Have you looked at Dwarves?...So your explanation of dwarven heterosexism is that you cannot imagine why a woman would want to have sex with another woman or a man would want to have sex with another man?Guys, your passive-aggressive attitude is going to gain mythic tiers.
Not every joke means that someone would shoot down homosexuals or whatever.
Relax.
I don't see the connection between cis/trans and gay men and lesbians (leaving aside that the text of that image is not cool).
The two women dwarfs explicitly stated, (in dwarven) that they were deeply in love. "Deeply" having special meaning to dwarves, who value notions of depth because they live underground.They do have sex, and that sex is lesbian dwarf sex. And this is being labeled a perversion.
I whole-heartedly agree with them: they are suffering under a sex-negative, heterosexist society. The sex-negativity coming from the clearly restrictive social norms surrounding sexuality. And the heterosexism (homophobia) coming from the fact that the only socially legitimated sexual acts are allowed under the ostensibly "natural" purposes of "breeding."
OK. You are clearly rejecting the theoretical premise of this thought experiment: that dwarves lack interest in sex.
You seem to be assuming that dwarves really must have the same variety and intensity of sexual desire that real humans do, but that it's being socially repressed.
As such, I wouldn't use this approach to dwarves in a game with you. (Or probably at all. It's a neat idea, but I'm not really sure where to go with it.)I'm actually rejecting the premise that "sex activity" is something that is biologically determined.
There seems to be this underlying notion that feelings of "disgust" or ideas about "perversion" are somehow built into human(oid) biology: that whenever dwarf feels disgusted by these two women, that disgust is due to some sort of "natural" (and moral") wrongness of their sexual relations.
And it is you who are assuming that dwarves have a more narrow range of sexual desire than humans.... Or is it that we are both making all of this up on the fly because it is all made up?
I was just asserting that there will be dwarves (maybe even a sexual minority of them) who don't fit normative dwarven standards, and thus will face marginalization because of their sexuality....
Sooo... you reject asexuality?
The problem with the dwarf scenario isn't...
No, I reject the claim that it's biologically determined.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't see the connection between cis/trans and gay men and lesbians (leaving aside that the text of that image is not cool).I think you understand that the only humor to be found in your "joke" was as the expense of gay men and lesbians. Good dodge though.Have you looked at Dwarves? Well, they looked at one another, and since they can't tell their men from their women, they probably reproduce only to swell their numbers and with the least possible contact.What's wrong with androgyny?Have you looked at Dwarves?...So your explanation of dwarven heterosexism is that you cannot imagine why a woman would want to have sex with another woman or a man would want to have sex with another man?Guys, your passive-aggressive attitude is going to gain mythic tiers.
Not every joke means that someone would shoot down homosexuals or whatever.
Relax.
Generally, cisgender heterosexuals have a difficult time recognize their privilege, and in turn do things like make "jokes" at the expense of queer folks.
I think there is a certain bit of fuzziness here that makes it more difficult to work with the original idea while clearly avoiding some of the potential pitfalls. If we go with the opening poster’s idea that dwarves are not asexual, but just have extremely low libido, to the point that most of them associate sex most strongly with reproduction, and perhaps only marginally with pleasure, that might be an interesting quirk to add to dwarves in world-building, in how it affects dwarven romance and so on.
The potential problem is that if dwarves normally think of sex in terms of reproduction, does that mean they think of what we would happily call homosexual sex as “not-sex?” That has uncomfortable real-world parallels, especially for women, I think. I mean, I’ve never heard of gay guys being harassed by women demanding why the fellows don’t want to try “the real thing” (so-called). The edge of “separate but equal” might conceivably be anthropologically interesting - I think there are real-world cultures that don’t have the conceptual space for "sex" in their ideas about homosexual relationships, but where homosexuality isn't a social "issue" - but then we start getting into the limits of cross-cultural communication and we do have to think about what we mean by heterocentrism and the like. If we want to avoid any such implications among our non-libidinous dwarves, we would have to make it unambiguously clear that homosexual dwarves aren’t looked down on (or worse) in their society.
If dwarves think of “not-hetero” as “not-sex,” it would have to be stressed that they are aware of and embrace as equally valid an analogue in homosexual relationships to what they do think of as sex. It would probably be easier, though, to find a way for dwarves to relate to their cultural understanding of sex regardless of their orientation. If that understanding involves ideas about (re)production and creation, perhaps homosexual dwarves traditionally think of sex as fostering inspiration that they can put to use in whatever work they do, giving birth to the art and skill that is also part of the survival of the community, as it were.
It would take a lot of effort to make it work with any player concerned about such things; ironically, though, the suggestion is one of the very few that would allow me to even consider playing a dwarf. Let’s see if I can spin out a quick example of how I think it might be handled best. Let’s say that Kotri, like most dwarves, finds the fuss oversexed tallfolk make about it peculiar, but then that’s just the way they are. After all, every once in a while she is moved herself to tend the forge, and she and her wife are happier people for it, life is a bit sweeter, and things go a bit better, just as those of her clan who have children can take pride in them and look ahead to the great deeds that, together, they will accomplish.
I tried to keep things as general as I could here. Is “tending the forge” a euphemism, or is it viewed as something different from what dwarves call (straight) sex? Either way, it is just as culturally valued, and I really do mean “just as” in the sense of “in the same way that” or “just as much as.” Having characters like that around might help make it clear that dwarves just don’t have much by way of libido, but if they tend to associate sex with reproduction for it, it doesn’t mean that other forms of sexuality are devalued.
No, I reject the claim that it's biologically determined.
How is it determined, then?
Generally, cisgender heterosexuals have a difficult time recognize their privilege, and in turn do things like make "jokes" at the expense of queer folks.
I know that, but that image does not say "cisgender heterosexual" and gay men and lesbians may be (and most are) cisgendered. And it's still inappropriate.