I can't wait to see the respectable Nambla NPC and the respectable druid and its "companion".I'll take your word for it, but I'm not the first (or even the millionth) gay man that's been accused of child molestation simply because I'm gay. Nor am I the first to have my desperately uneventful sex life likened to beastiality. Nor am I the first to have both done in the same sentence.
Frankly I don't really care about if their are homosexual characters or not, though I would say that the fact that the only group that has been bothered by it in Pathfinder series was a immoral family is a bit disturbing.Would you object to the same depiction if the only racists in town were an immoral family? Having something against homosexuality is morally identical to having something against being black or Jewish in my book.
To me that shows there is not a very balanced view on this issue. It also indicates, perhaps subconsciously, that one can't be opposed to homosexual behaviour (whether done by a homosexual, heterosexual, bisexual, trysexual or whatever) and be a decent person in the viewpoint of the Paizo staff/writers. James' comments about how he finds such ideas disgusting do nothing to aleviate that viewpoint.That's my reading of James' comment and that reading sold me a PDF of Classic Monsters Revisited and the gazetteer. I was on the edge anyway thanks to the unspeakable quality of Paizo's output, but it became a chance for me to get some nice gaming books and reward positive (and brave, how many businesses will tell you that you're welcome not to buy their stuff rather than produce a PR-friendly boilerplate?) behavior on the part of the producers. It's a win on both fronts.
Now if that makes my view or James' view unbalanced somehow, then hurray for being unbalanced.
Please believe that not all heterosexuals think bigotry is OK as long as it is against gays.
Other than that, I'm out.
Out of curiosity...can one be opposed to heterosexuality and still be a decent person?
Well I remember a story about some homosexuals going to a community in the NE and calling people "breeders", and not in a nice "thanks for continuing the species" way. But I don't know if that was an opposition to heterosexuality or merely heterosexuals.
How can one be "opposed" to homosexuality without being opposed to homosexual PEOPLE? What does that even mean?
Don't know, since that is not what I said. I said homosexual behaviour, whether it was done by heterosexuals, homosexuals, bisexuals, or whatever.
Coming back to your first statement and the "and still be a decent person" part. Well if someone was opposed to heterosexual behaviour in general not just for themselves, that would seem pretty illogical from an evolutionary standpoint. Except in the case of the ST:NG episode The Outcast where Riker has sexual relations with an androgynous alien, from a species that views any kind of gender identification a sexual perversion (heterosexuality is condemned, homosexuality is accepted). But yes, I believe that someone, such as a citizen of the alien species in that episode, could be a decent person and still think that heterosexuality is inappropriate. Just like I think an elf could be decent and think that humans and elves mating is inappropriate. I don't think one character "flaw" is enough to condemn someone as a worthless being.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I usually write three pages, but I think I'll keep this one short.
.
.
.
.
- Yay for diversity.
- Yay for not closing our eyes to the fact that people with different sexual orientations exist, and have a right to continue to do so.
- Yay for denouncing bigotry.
- Not all Christians can be generalized.
There, all done. :)
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Samnell,
I didn't see you getting assused. Must have missed that.
Funny thing about the animal companion argement. In reality you can't get consent from an animal. In D&D you have speak with animal and awaken animal.
As to pedophelia, sorry, anyone who molests a child should be treated like roguerogue's ancient homosecuals who he feels me must avenge.
We did have an amusing situation in game once, where the halfling sisters kept trying to seduce the paladin (all PCs). The Paladin wasn't sworn to Chastity, but he didn't have interest "Because they're like little children."
This is kind of degrading into sex in D&D arguements.
|
One extremely important thing to keep in mind -
This is a fantasy game. Now, some people will say that they don't want 'x' in their fantasy game, and they don't have to have it.
But we should put as much in as we can, so that other people can see themselves in the game.
I happen to be a white male. If every picture of adventurers shows only other white males it won't feel 'inclusive' to other groups. So for all the people that have something against homosexuality but not homosexuals, this is a good 'encouragement' for LGB members of the community to feel 'included'.
Personally, I feel that the intolerance the gay community has been shown reflects poorly on us as a society. Even if one were to accept the argument that practicing same sex relations is 'evil', the people who believe that those individuals are going to hell have no cause to 'save them'. Especially since most of the 'accusations' don't seem to be geared in that direction anyway. There are certainly things that one should be intolerant toward, because those activities are bad for individuals or society - like murder or slavery.
And organized religion is not the problem, either. As much 'evil' as organzied religion can be accused of, there is also much good that it can take credit for. Our own abolitionist movement was 'won' on religious principles, and the civil rights movement was empowered by a call to a higher power. It is no coincidence that Martin Luther King, Jr was a Reverened.
Organized religion is a call to each of us to accept a greater power. Christian religion in particular also has the call to love both our neighbor and our enemy. Disciples of Jesus are taught that what they do for the 'least' of God's children, they do for God. That's a pretty powerful incentive toward social justice. While there are certainly noble atheists and agnostics, FAITH that all humans are a reflection of divinity includes a call to help all men and avoids the snare of 'self-worship' which is possible if you believe in no higher form than humanity in general.
So, I think that in the real world and in Golarion religion and sexuality (of all denominations) have a place. Our job as DMs is to make sure that we keep it in its place based on the sensibilities of our players (but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't challenge the players who should be our friends to think in new ways). There is a lot of power in RPGs and 'shared storytelling'. I have no complaints about the way Paizo has addressed sexuality in the game.
Creative Director
|
...said some important stuff to keep in mind...
I understand 100% where you're coming from, roguerogue, but just because a character's gay shouldn't automatically exempt them from being the bad guy or bad girl. As folk have pointed out, we've had other homosexual NPCs in the various adventures here and there who weren't villains. And in Crismon Throne, the fact that one of the villains is gay and one is bi shouldn't be interpreted as anything more than that.
In fact... both of those characters are quite a bit more complex than you might think. Sabina, for example, has only really had one on-screen scene in the campaign. Her next big scene occurs in the last adventure, and while she starts out as an enemy of the party... she doesn't necessarily END as their enemy. AKA: Not all villains are villains forever...
But look at it this way... for every NPC who we say, in print, is gay or straight, there are DOZENS that we don't pin down to a specific sexual orientation. Because in the case of those dozens, it really doesn't matter; it's best to let each GM decide for him/herself if it ever really comes up in play. And in the case of characters who might develop a romantic relationship with a PC, we strive to remain gender-neutral there as well.
|
Luckily, thanks to psychiatrists I don't have to. They're willing to study people like you for the good of society.
I went to mental health after returning from Kuwait last time. They said the help I need, they can't give.
Since I'm bored here, and you so politely asked, I'll expound on my view. I do not like homosexuality. No matter if it is a societial conditioning or a genuinely informed opinion of mine, I don't like it. I also do not like theft. I used to shoplift when I was younger. I do not any longer. (Steady paychecks help curb that behavior.) However, I try my best not to tell other people how to live their lives. If they love in that way, let them. If they choose to steal, it is their choice.
Maybe it seems senseless to you. I wouldn't be surprised. Explaining my feelings is not something I'm practiced in. If you have a different take on my words and can explain in a fashion I don't find insulting, please answer. I shall read it when I wake. That's all the time I have for you tonight. A pleasure conversing with you.
And it is perfectly alright Jade. I and my manliness love and support you.
|
In fact... both of those characters are quite a bit more complex than you might think. Sabina, for example, has only really had one on-screen scene in the campaign. Her next big scene occurs in the last adventure, and while she starts out as an enemy of the party... she doesn't necessarily END as their enemy. AKA: Not all villains are villains forever...
Nothing like tragedy and the hope to prevent more of the same to get those PCs motivated.
I think "outing" the gay iconic would go a long way toward providing a positive personality to focus on (as opposed to the "cliched" evil lesbians).
Nice hack job, but I will try to respond to you in a more respectful fashion than you apparently hold me in.
I'll take your word for it, but I'm not the first (or even the millionth) gay man that's been accused of child molestation simply because I'm gay. Nor am I the first to have my desperately uneventful sex life likened to beastiality. Nor am I the first to have both done in the same sentence.
I said I was being flippant, and no I wasn't comparing homosexuality to those ideas but instead the idea for tolerance for homosexuality for tolerance for other types of sexuality. If we say that there is a line that it is inappropriate to cross, then who gets to pick, you say homosexuality is on the safe side, but the Nambla guys say their ideas are also on the safe side, you say they are wrong, how are you acting any differently than the heterosexuals that say you are wrong?
Though I will say that if you have ever tried to use the whole Greek man/boy situation as an argument for saying homosexuality is ok, then you wouldn't have any place to stand on complaining about homosexuality being compared to child molestation. Now if you don't agree with the Greeks being used as a justification, then certainly you have every right to feel offended by such a comparison.
Would you object to the same depiction if the only racists in town were an immoral family? Having something against homosexuality is morally identical to having something against being black or Jewish in my book.
You mean like how often it is portrayed that elves hate dwarves and dwarves hate elves and yet both are still said to be good? So it would be appropriate to call them all immoral because they dislike other races? Also read back in Sandpoint, the sheriff's brother is prejudice and he isn't described as being immoral.
That's my reading of James' comment and that reading sold me a PDF of Classic Monsters Revisited and the gazetteer. I was on the edge anyway thanks to the unspeakable quality of Paizo's output, but it became a chance for me to get some nice gaming books and reward positive (and brave, how many businesses will tell you that you're welcome not to buy their stuff rather than produce a PR-friendly boilerplate?) behavior on the part of the producers. It's a win on both fronts.
Now if that makes my view or James' view unbalanced somehow, then hurray for being unbalanced.
Which is fine, but let's not pretend one side is being "tolerant" and one side is not, ok. That is being intellectually dishonest, at the very least to ourselves.
Guys...keep it friendly. At some point agree to disagree.
I said I was being flippant, and no I wasn't comparing homosexuality to those ideas but instead the idea for tolerance for homosexuality for tolerance for other types of sexuality. If we say that there is a line that it is inappropriate to cross, then who gets to pick, you say homosexuality is on the safe side, but the Nambla guys say their ideas are also on the safe side, you say they are wrong, how are you acting any differently than the heterosexuals that say you are wrong?
Consent is the difference. Two adult men, or adult women, are not harming anyone else by indulging in whatever behavior they like.
Children and animals cannot consent.That's a bloody big difference.
The Greek/NAMBLA thing should be dropped.
Now ther is a "Homosexuality On Golarion" thread to complement the "Homosexuality In Golarion" thread? Isn't that sort of redundant?
Not really redundant, just repeating itself.
|
|
The Greek/NAMBLA thing should be dropped.Agreed. Keep it civil, folks! Don't make me fire up my suppress button again!
Do you have a suppress button? Like, when you log in and you see a 'reply' button, you also see a 'suppress' button?
What other buttons do you have?
If I were in charge of the website, I think I would add buttons that do nothing, but are cool, and perhaps therapeutic for the staff. Like a 'kill' button. You press it and the avatar moves in to the center of the screen and something bad happens to it... Or something.
I'm starting the 'More Buttons for James Jacobs Society'. Then you can tell us what fun you have with them.
You eat porn? Personally i just watch it.they'd find 15 lbs of porn in me that I never ate. ;)
Well experiment a little would you.
Indeed. A Smite button is apropo.
In less than twenty four hours this thread has become the third most replied to on the General Discussion board of Pathfinder (along with having its own commentary thread), knocking off discussions about fourth edition among other things.
You know guys he's right. Christan, Jew, Gay, Stright, lets all come together and start knocking 4th editon again. As one single voice.
In less than twenty four hours this thread has become the third most replied to on the General Discussion board of Pathfinder (along with having its own commentary thread), knocking off discussions about fourth edition among other things.
You know guys he's right. Christan, Jew, Gay, Stright, lets all come together and start knocking 4th editon again. As one single voice.
LOL! I'm in.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
In less than twenty four hours this thread has become the third most replied to on the General Discussion board of Pathfinder (along with having its own commentary thread), knocking off discussions about fourth edition among other things.
You know guys he's right. Christan, Jew, Gay, Stright, lets all come together and start knocking 4th editon again. As one single voice.
That made me laugh
Consent is the difference. Two adult men, or adult women, are not harming anyone else by indulging in whatever behavior they like.
Children and animals cannot consent.That's a bloody big difference.
Not that I disagree, but let me play devil's advocate for a moment.
If a druid shapeshifts into a "hot" female wolf (irregardless of what race or gender they are normally) and shakes her behind in front of a normal male wolf. He then mounts her and does what comes "naturally", is consent even an issue? In the wild, what does consent have to do with sex? Watching a nature show, does the lioness tell the lion, "Sure I'm in the mood." No, consent is a non-factor in the wild, and morality based on it may also be a non-factor.
As for children, well what age are we talking about. A 5 month old is alot different than a 10 year old. Can a child form intent? Can a child do 1st degree murder? If we accept that child of some age can make informed decisions and make moral choices, why couldn't they consent? The idea that "children" (what we as civilized westerns may consider as a child) couldn't consent is not universally accepted historically or geographically. In some cultures a girl was a woman if she started to menostrate, sure historically those girls start at a later age, but age wasn't a consideration, so Mary might be a woman at 12 and Sue might be a woman at 14.
In the wild, what does consent have to do with sex? Watching a nature show, does the lioness tell the lion, "Sure I'm in the mood." No, consent is a non-factor in the wild, and morality based on it may also be a non-factor.
Although rape does occur in the animal world, don't many species wait for their heat cycles? I'll agree about amorality. Squirrels hit that @#$% like they're angry at it. Right and wrong hold no dominion in an upper-bough wrasslin' match.
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Greek/NAMBLA thing should be dropped.Agreed. Keep it civil, folks! Don't make me fire up my suppress button again!Do you have a suppress button? Like, when you log in and you see a 'reply' button, you also see a 'suppress' button?
What other buttons do you have?
If I were in charge of the website, I think I would add buttons that do nothing, but are cool, and perhaps therapeutic for the staff. Like a 'kill' button. You press it and the avatar moves in to the center of the screen and something bad happens to it... Or something.
I'm starting the 'More Buttons for James Jacobs Society'. Then you can tell us what fun you have with them.
I have a Delete button, an Edit button, a Suppress button, and a Reply button. Sometimes that gets me in trouble... especially when I have bad aim and click "EDIT" when I'm aiming for "REPLY."
But I'm always up for more buttons!
|
Creative Director
|
WHEW!
All this talk about evil lesbians started to stress me out. (CRIMSON THRONE SPOILER TO FOLLOW!)
Consent is the difference. Two adult men, or adult women, are not harming anyone else by indulging in whatever behavior they like.
Children and animals cannot consent.That's a bloody big difference.
Not that I disagree, but let me play devil's advocate for a moment.
If a druid shapeshifts into a "hot" female wolf (irregardless of what race or gender they are normally) and shakes her behind in front of a normal male wolf. He then mounts her and does what comes "naturally", is consent even an issue? In the wild, what does consent have to do with sex? Watching a nature show, does the lioness tell the lion, "Sure I'm in the mood." No, consent is a non-factor in the wild, and morality based on it may also be a non-factor.
As for children, well what age are we talking about. A 5 month old is alot different than a 10 year old. Can a child form intent? Can a child do 1st degree murder? If we accept that child of some age can make informed decisions and make moral choices, why couldn't they consent? The idea that "children" (what we as civilized westerns may consider as a child) couldn't consent is not universally accepted historically or geographically. In some cultures a girl was a woman if she started to menostrate, sure historically those girls start at a later age, but age wasn't a consideration, so Mary might be a woman at 12 and Sue might be a woman at 14.
Once again a topic and line of reasoning we could do without. Time to move on.
Down with 4E!
If a druid shapeshifts into a "hot" female wolf (irregardless of what race or gender they are normally) and shakes her behind in front of a normal male wolf. He then mounts her and does what comes "naturally", is consent even an issue? In the wild, what does consent have to do with sex? Watching a nature show, does the lioness tell the lion, "Sure I'm in the mood." No, consent is a non-factor in the wild, and morality based on it may also be a non-factor.
Quoted this because it stuck out for me, as a point of literary reference.
In a game/literary sense, it is a fitting situation. Take a look at David Eddings books. Belgarath, the lead wizard/cleric/druid in his Balgariad and Malorian series of books, had a daughter. Polgara. Though human, her mother was a wolf who later learned how to become human as an alternative form. Polgara was conceived with her parents were in wolf form.
Though I will say that if you have ever tried to use the whole Greek man/boy situation as an argument for saying homosexuality is ok, then you wouldn't have any place to stand on complaining about homosexuality being compared to child molestation.
I think you're wrong here and that's because there are at least 2 different issues at work. There's the acceptability of same-sex sexual relations and the issue of adolescent sexuality, both of which have followed different trajectories over the years.
Luckily, thanks to psychiatrists I don't have to. They're willing to study people like you for the good of society.I went to mental health after returning from Kuwait last time. They said the help I need, they can't give.
Since I'm bored here, and you so politely asked, I'll expound on my view. I do not like homosexuality. No matter if it is a societial conditioning or a genuinely informed opinion of mine, I don't like it. I also do not like theft. I used to shoplift when I was younger. I do not any longer. (Steady paychecks help curb that behavior.) However, I try my best not to tell other people how to live their lives. If they love in that way, let them. If they choose to steal, it is their choice.
Maybe it seems senseless to you. I wouldn't be surprised. Explaining my feelings is not something I'm practiced in. If you have a different take on my words and can explain in a fashion I don't find insulting, please answer. I shall read it when I wake. That's all the time I have for you tonight. A pleasure conversing with you.
And it is perfectly alright Jade. I and my manliness love and support you.
I removed that comment because I realized it wasn't productive. I'm sorry it got to you.
Not liking homosexuality is one thing. Likening it to illegal behavior is another. You are (fallaciously) ceating a parallel, which leads to drawing unsupported conclusions based on that parallel.
It is no different than:
Religion is like fraud.
Fraud is a crime.
Therefore, religion is a crime.
I don't know any clearer way to state that.
|
|
Bugleyman, I know you and I dislike each other as people, but just because you dislike me doesn't make everything I say incorrect. When you boil it down to its base components, you can lay all of the evils of humanity at the foot of one thing: human nature. The fact of the matter is, many evil things done in the name of religions are not condoned by the religion they're done in the name of's own teachings! Which points back to human nature. People WILL do bad stuff. Usually, they either admit it's bad themselves or at least know others will think it's bad, so they grab something higher than themselves to justify it. Religion has always been convenient for this. (Though in the last century, political systems like Fascism and Communism are certainly giving it a run for its money. Look at the body counts in Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia alone!) However, if you eradicate religion, people will not stop being awful to each other, and (assuming you'd want to do it by force, which, incidentally, I don't assume of you, this is just to make a point) you would have to kill over 85% of the human race to accomplish that goal in the first place. Now, I'm no great ethicist, but even I'm reasonably sure killing over 4.5 billion people is far worse than thinking your gay neighbor is sinning when he goes to bed with his partner, especially if you keep it to yourself and treat him as well as any of your other neighbors (love the sinner, hate the sin). Almost everyone on the planet cares about religion, no matter which one they do (or don't in your case) practice. If you want to say you can't love the sinner while hating the sin... ...can you love a family member with a severe drug problem while still acknowledging that it's ruining their life and hurting everyone around them and lobbying for them to STOP taking drugs? Because that's a very good example of a nonsexual instance of that in play.
As far as the whole homosexuality thing goes, there seem to be people who have sexual traits that lead them to do other, much more harmful things than just getting intimate with members of the same sex (pedophilia, necrophilia, rape, etc.) so be careful if you use that argument as the cornerstone of your reasoning. Just to be clear, I am NOT equating homosexuality to those other, more deviant behaviors in any way except to call both traits (much like red hair, brown eyes, or introvertedness). In fact, unless the homosexuality trait is paired with the rapist or pedophile ones, I see it about as benign as the eye color one. (Though like the "likes the taste of broccoli" trait, I don't even possess a shred of it, though I must admit that two of the celebrities I'd actually not mind meeting are gay as can be. Tim Gunn & Ellen Degeneres, if you're wondering.) Just because someone's inclined to do something biologically or psychologically doesn't automatically make it good or bad. As far as the dogma argument goes: I see at LEAST as much hatred directed at benign people from furious secular humanists and atheists as I do from any religious groups. Atheists and humanists for whatever reason (at least in my anecdotal experience) seem to be exceedingly pissed-off, hostile people. I mean, like ALL THE TIME. If you're going to hate someone just because they're a Christian, I suppose that's your right, but it's no better than them hating you because you're an atheist. Both of you are as convinced as the other that they just KNOW their own side is right.
Anywho...
As a gay gamer, I would just like to tip my hat to Paizo, for their inclusion of LGBT characters in their story lines and Golarion. While, yes, homosexuality is a bit of a "hot topic", I applaud them for this move. It is yet another reason, why they continue to garner my support.
I likewise, have complete faith in Paizo's writers to handle these situations with the level of quality I have come to expect from them, in their writing and story telling abilities. Sure, we have the "Crazed Lesbo" protagonist in the current AP. That alone though, is nothing really compared to how American film has portrayed homosexuals in the past, as well as the relative present. The documentary, The Celluloid Closet does a great job of presenting this.
I would also like to point out this isn't a new thing for Paizo either. The Shackled City AP, also had it's homosexual relationship going on in the backstory of the AP (provided I was reading it right). Adimarchus's lover who betrayed him, leading to his imprisonment, was none other than the son to Graz'zt. So, even back then, Paizo was showing its quality as an open-minded group with their writings and the completeness of their visions for their story's.
Anyways, I just think it is a-freakin' cool that they have wrote in a gay paladin. I mean really, just how cool is that? :oP
|
|
Random Comments:
I go to sleep and I am beaten in listing evidence to back my comments!
I think a careful examination of the 20th century will reveal more people killed because of (political) philosophy than because of religion by a massive margin. Even the 19th century was rather wholly given over to philosophy driven mass killings and exterminations.
To believe secular philosophy is innocent of the excesses of the 18 centuries when Christianity existed before it, or the 50 or so centuries of general human history before that demonstrates a lack of historical knowledge and perspective.
The South Park episode Death Camp of Tolerance is an excellent reference for intolerance from both ends of the spectrum, and indeed highlights the distinction between tolerance and acceptance.
There was a nauseating incident on the WotC message boards that highlighted the distinction above and beyond. Of the gay gamers at the local venue (a rather significant sub-group) that I mentioned the event to, all were rather disturbed by the lead up, never mind the finale. For me the worst part of the finale was not the person who wound up booted, but the people who popped up to express admiration for the post that went beyond any rational (let alone reasonable) limit.
As for requests for some sort of moral limit within game material, that is reasonable. I have commented on issues I have with certain presentations in Paizo material. The point where the line is crossed is when such comments focus on condemnations of people instead of expressing a dislike of the material. There is no need for saying various of the things deleted (which still appear quoted in other posts) to say that you are not happy with the inclusion of gay characters in the game.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sure, we have the "Crazed Lesbo" protagonist in the current AP.
You mean antagonist? (You're talking about Ileosa, right?) I see her more as a "crazed tyrant" than a "crazed lesbo". I mean, assassins? Plague? Stormtroopers? That goes way beyond any sexual/relationship issues she may have, man. WAY beyond.
Edit: if anything, I see Ileosa's sexuality as another function of her power-mad-ness. She'll sleep with whoever she needs to to get what she wants, be they male, female, or (possibly) draconic...
Atheists and humanists for whatever reason (at least in my anecdotal experience) seem to be exceedingly pissed-off, hostile people. I mean, like ALL THE TIME.
I'm an atheist and I'll destroy you for saying that. ;) No but really, I only know one hostile atheist personally. The rest are all pretty even tempered. I speak up when I see us non-believers getting lumped into any one box. We are as diverse as little fluffy white snowflakes.
|
|
Atheists and humanists for whatever reason (at least in my anecdotal experience) seem to be exceedingly pissed-off, hostile people. I mean, like ALL THE TIME.I'm an atheist and I'll destroy you for saying that. ;) No but really, I only know one hostile atheist personally. The rest are all pretty even tempered. I speak up when I see us non-believers getting lumped into any one box. We are as diverse as little fluffy white snowflakes.
If you know some laid-back, friendly atheists, would you mind boxing a few up and shipping them over here, please? Someone like Dave Barry or Terry Pratchett would be nice. I'll send you back some of the cranky ones. I think some shipments got switched or something. I'll even throw in some friendly agnostics. We have lots of those.
Like I said, I know my data's anecdotal, but dang...
|
|
Oh i have plenty, but eating a DVD just sounds like it would cause all kinds of problems. :)Well experiment a little would you.You eat porn? Personally i just watch it.they'd find 15 lbs of porn in me that I never ate. ;)
Yeah, if you really need that much fiber in your diet, there are so many better ways...
|
|
As for children, well what age are we talking about. A 5 month old is alot different than a 10 year old. Can a child form intent? Can a child do 1st degree murder? If we accept that child of some age can make informed decisions and make moral choices, why couldn't they consent? The idea that "children" (what we as civilized westerns may consider as a child) couldn't consent is not universally accepted historically or geographically. In some cultures a girl was a woman if she started to menostrate, sure historically those girls start at a later age, but age wasn't a consideration, so Mary might be a woman at 12 and Sue might be a woman at 14.
Can a child really be sent down at age 10 - that's absurd!
I work in a schol, and I can tell you with absolute certainty... Mary and Sue are both just girls.
But, at least here in the UK, the law is a bit more subtle and nuanced - if two confused adolescents (all adolescents are confused) have underage sex then the response is very different to an adult having sex with a child.
The cultures that immediately spring to mind in which a woman could marry when they were reproducitvely active were also cultures in which women were essentially property, and the modern nutritional environment in which some women are sexually capable at 12 is not part of the historical model unless you go back to pre-farming humans - traditions need to be understood in context.
|
|
Yeah, if you really need that much fiber in your diet, there are so many better ways...Oh i have plenty, but eating a DVD just sounds like it would cause all kinds of problems. :)Well experiment a little would you.You eat porn? Personally i just watch it.they'd find 15 lbs of porn in me that I never ate. ;)
Those dual-layered discs are hard to beat now.
some laid-back, friendly atheists,
Hi!
...said some important stuff to keep in mind...I understand 100% where you're coming from, roguerogue, but just because a character's gay shouldn't automatically exempt them from being the bad guy or bad girl. As folk have pointed out, we've had other homosexual NPCs in the various adventures here and there who weren't villains. And in Crismon Throne, the fact that one of the villains is gay and one is bi shouldn't be interpreted as anything more than that.
As I wrote, my concern was based on balance of representation. So, I'm curious: what are these other NPCs you're referring to? I've read the entire thread up to this point and all I've seen was the background Sandpoint relationship.
(The Shackled City path I'm not familiar with, largely because, I think, it was published through Dungeon, and I was a player then. All I'm going on is your company's work on the Pathfinder and Game Mastery materials.)
|
|
some laid-back, friendly atheists,Hi!
Wow! They're shipping them in the egg and everything!
(Incidentally, if you DO actually happen to be in the same general region as me, I am looking for a gaming group. Edit: checks Ross's profile. Dang! Nevermind. Florida & Illinois are a bit too far apart to be considered part of the same region on anything lower than a continental scale...)
Atheists and humanists for whatever reason (at least in my anecdotal experience) seem to be exceedingly pissed-off, hostile people. I mean, like ALL THE TIME.I'm an atheist and I'll destroy you for saying that. ;) No but really, I only know one hostile atheist personally. The rest are all pretty even tempered. I speak up when I see us non-believers getting lumped into any one box. We are as diverse as little fluffy white snowflakes.
If you know some laid-back, friendly atheists, would you mind boxing a few up and shipping them over here, please? Someone like Dave Barry or Terry Pratchett would be nice. I'll send you back some of the cranky ones. I think some shipments got switched or something. I'll even throw in some friendly agnostics. We have lots of those.
Like I said, I know my data's anecdotal, but dang...
I saw and appreciated that anecdotal disclaimer. I am boxing friendly atheists right now. I'm only able to afford ground shipping so have some food and a box cutter at the ready.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I saw and appreciated that anecdotal disclaimer. I am boxing friendly atheists right now. I'm only able to afford ground shipping so have some food and a box cutter at the ready.Atheists and humanists for whatever reason (at least in my anecdotal experience) seem to be exceedingly pissed-off, hostile people. I mean, like ALL THE TIME.I'm an atheist and I'll destroy you for saying that. ;) No but really, I only know one hostile atheist personally. The rest are all pretty even tempered. I speak up when I see us non-believers getting lumped into any one box. We are as diverse as little fluffy white snowflakes.
If you know some laid-back, friendly atheists, would you mind boxing a few up and shipping them over here, please? Someone like Dave Barry or Terry Pratchett would be nice. I'll send you back some of the cranky ones. I think some shipments got switched or something. I'll even throw in some friendly agnostics. We have lots of those.
Like I said, I know my data's anecdotal, but dang...
Is pizza okay? I'm packing the cranky atheists and the cranky Christians in a poorly-seperated box and shipping them to you. You live on an otherwise-uninhabited tiny desert island in the middle of the Pacific that doesn't appear on any normal shipping or flight patterns, right? No? Dang. I sent it there already. The friendly agnostics are standing by, awaiting a shipping address.
Sure, we have the "Crazed Lesbo" protagonist in the current AP.You mean antagonist? (You're talking about Ileosa, right?)
Umm... yeah... Antagonist... sorry, my bad.
While I agree, "crazed tyrant" is more apropos, I chose to use my reference to try and bring some of the conversation back towards the OP, and the conversation of homosexuality on Golarion. As the thread is going now, it is dangerously sliding off that edge where tempers could really start flying.
What I am finding interesting though, is how this is seeming to be an issue. Personally, I was just enjoying those little tidbits that made it into the AP's so far. I'll have to do some digging, but did this issue even come up in the Shackled City AP? Or are people deciding to say something now, because these "issues" are becoming part of the backstory for the Pathfinder RPG/world?
As I wrote, my concern was based on balance of representation. So, I'm curious: what are these other NPCs you're referring to? I've read the entire thread up to this point and all I've seen was the background Sandpoint relationship.
I believe there was a gay halfling in Rise of the Kobold King.
|
|
As I wrote, my concern was based on balance of representation. So, I'm curious: what are these other NPCs you're referring to? I've read the entire thread up to this point and all I've seen was the background Sandpoint relationship.I believe there was a gay halfling in Rise of the Kobold King.
Confirmed. And for the life of me I can't help but think the alignment for him was listed wrong, at least when taking only his character description as presented in RotKK into account.
And as for all the talk about transgendered characters: Did anyone ever bring up Gozreh?
You know...my first gaming experience with this issue was back in the 90s. Many many moons ago...
I had a friend who'd been with the group forever. We also had a friend who was homophobic to the point of paranoia playing with us. Friend 1 had a secret he was keeping because he didn't want to lose Friend 2's...uh...friendship.
Long story short...Friend 1 was gay and got outed out of spite by a guest player who had issues with him. There was a lot of drama over it but for me the issue came down to why couldn't I still hang with him and have fun whatever his orientation?
Friend 2 eventually realized that friends are friends no matter what...but it was a long hard road.
So why don't we all just be friends here and stop fighting about this issue?