Homosexuality in Golarion


Lost Omens Campaign Setting General Discussion

5,351 to 5,400 of 5,778 << first < prev | 103 | 104 | 105 | 106 | 107 | 108 | 109 | 110 | 111 | 112 | 113 | next > last >>
Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mystic_Snowfang wrote:

This whole talk if biologically appropriateness got me wondering.

Is it biologically correct to call a female minotaur a cow?

Only out of earshot/axe swing.


I would think that would be the equivalent of calling humans apes

Silver Crusade

MMCJawa wrote:
I would think that would be the equivalent of calling humans apes

I meant cow as the term for a female bovine, and whale, and manatee...

Just like a female catfolk might be a molly and a male a tom. Or it a she-kitsune is a vixen.


Mystic_Snowfang wrote:

This whole talk if biologically appropriateness got me wondering.

Is it biologically correct to call a female minotaur a cow?

I would hope that everyone would be fine with a particular group deciding to call female minotaurs cows, even though the term has been used in an incorrect and insulting fashion towards some women, particularly some overweight women.


pres man wrote:
Mystic_Snowfang wrote:

This whole talk if biologically appropriateness got me wondering.

Is it biologically correct to call a female minotaur a cow?

I would hope that everyone would be fine with a particular group deciding to call female minotaurs cows, even though the term has been used in an incorrect and insulting fashion towards some women, particularly some overweight women.

How about a term for female dog-people?

I have several friends in the dog show/breeding business and it throws me every time.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Dog show people have 99 problems, but b@*!%es ain't one.

Silver Crusade

Iridian Fold action in the web fiction going on right now.

Boar and Rabbit - Part 1

Part 2

FEELINGS


1 person marked this as a favorite.
thejeff wrote:
People like different things. People are bothered by different things. Removing everything that anyone won't like just leaves a bland, boring game.

And impossible game. Some would object to there being a game in the first place!


JiCi wrote:
Pathfinder has its share of LGBT characters, and homosexuality is something common in Golarion's society. The ONLY thing that you MIGHT wanna know about that is that LGBT characters aren't that numerous

So, "it's share" translates into "not that numerous"...

JiCi wrote:
not because they're hiding or are being hunted, but simply because they didn't come out... and even if they did, it might have gotten so little impact that people simply didn't care much about it.

This is contradictory because a person's orientation is generally known publicly unless that person actively tries to hide it, in which case the person is relying on the assumption of heterosexuality (the assumption that anyone is heterosexual until proven otherwise). That assumption is usually couched with what I call "gay invisibility rhetoric" which is the argument that gayness is always irrelevant (impolite, distracting, unwanted, personal).

An example is when there is a book about Darwin that shows how his wife and children heavily influenced the course of his work (particularly his wife) and the same teacher who likes that book would not tell her/his class that author Willa Cather had a female spouse for many years on the grounds that that isn't relevant to her work.

There is no need for a grand coming out in a society where being gay is equivalent to being hetero, but that also doesn't mean you don't generally know what a person's orientation is unless they're a total stranger. Most workplaces, for instance, have employee pictures of spouses and such at their desks. Casual conversations are likely to bring up one's significant other, kids, etc.

JiCi wrote:
There's no harm done making an established heterosexual NPC homosexual, just like there's no harm done making an established homosexual NPC heterosexual.

It depends. If gaming groups always "cleanse" the writing of gay characters that can be a problem for gay gamers at the table.

JiCi wrote:
If there is... then blame the DM and/or the players for not accepting it, but by no mean, it's the authors' fault.

It's certainly not under the author's control, unless the author writes the gay characters in a way that causes the GM to be more likely to "cleanse" their orientation. For instance, if every gay character is the ideal hero and every hetero guy is an obnoxious twit, I can see many DMs reversing the roles to conform with typical expectations. That's, of course, not the only dichotomous way the two orientations can be presented, but the point is that it's good for there to be diversity in the depictions of people of both orientations. Gay characters shouldn't always be fools or villains and hetero males shouldn't always be the valiant heroes.

JiCi wrote:
homosexuality isn't as taboo as it was in the past. It is often accepted and not chatised upon.

Acceptance is actually a level of heterosexism. People accept things they have no control over but would change if they were to have control. The equates gayness with something unfortunate that one has to accept, like the death of a loved one.

Appreciation is actually the positive word.

Shadow Lodge

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Quote:
Acceptance is actually a level of heterosexism. People accept things they have no control over but would change if they were to have control. The equates gayness with something unfortunate that one has to accept, like the death of a loved one.

I'm sorry, but when you turn acceptance into a form of discrimination, it becomes obvious that you're just looking for opportunities to take offense.


Kthulhu wrote:

I'm sorry, but when you turn acceptance into a form of discrimination, it becomes obvious that you're just looking for opportunities to take offense.

Yeah, acceptance is most definitely a positive in my book. Tolerance, on the other hand, has neutral-to-negative connotations. To me, one tolerates something unpleasant but necessary, while accepting something in a non-judgmental, welcoming manner.

But hey, semantics.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
copmc wrote:
I think one of the things I read before joining this site was to be sure that whatever you post is not offensive to other players. Can we really do that in a fictitious world if most of us can not do that in the real world?

Let's not worry about "we," and go ahead and concentrate on "I." I know I can do my best not to offend other people, both in real life and on these largely anonymous message boards. I know I do not feel unduly burdened by this rule. And I don't think I am unique in this.

copmc wrote:
Back to the individual who made this post. What does adding more individuals of a given trait or sexuality really add to this game? If I create a story and I think something will enhance a game then it is great to add as much fluff as necessary. If we are adding something because we need to be politically correct or meet some type of quota, then I think that is being a little ridiculous.

I agree with you entirely! However, as I have no inside knowledge about how Paizo comes up with its ideas, I would be hesitant to assume such a quota exists. For example, I don't know why Amber Scott (bless her) decided to include the character Anevia in The Worldwound Incursion. Anevia is a woman who was born a man, and ended up marrying another woman. Perhaps Amber Scott (bless her) knows transgendered people in real life, or simply wished to be more inclusive with her work. Or perhaps some tyrannical Paizo overlord (not to be confused with a Paizo tyrannosaurus overlord, because that guy rocks) demanded that The Worldwound Incursion had a transgendered character. I don't know, and thus will give Paizo the benefit of the doubt here.

So again, I agree that a "politically correct quota" is absurd. If such a thing exists.

Spoiler:

It does not.

copmc wrote:
I enjoy role playing games for the fantasy not the reality. I want to escape the insanity I experience everyday and read on the news. I want to get lost in a world that is nothing like the one we live in. Every time we start making fantasy feel more like the real world then it becomes less enjoyable to me and I am sure to many others as well.

This rationalization bothers me, because where do you draw the line? How much of the real world is it okay to inject into a fantasy game? What is the arbitrary point at which things get too real for you or others? Because wherever you decide to draw that line, you are, intentionally or not, choosing what is and is not normal enough. And thus, what is also abnormal. What is wrong.

Humans? Clearly they're okay because they show up in almost all fantasy games. Therefore, one can assume they haven't made a "fantasy feel more like the real world." Racial diversity? Yup, fortunately we have that too, rightfully and without complaint. And of course heterosexual romance is welcome. But man, homosexuality? People who identify as a different sex? People who biologically transition to another sex? Waaaait just a minute, hold up. That is too real! All those other elements that make up the baseline of a fantasy world are good and all, but let's not take things that far.

Except here's the problem.

All those things exist. They have the same right to be baseline as the rest. They deserve to be every bit as standard, average, normal, and - dare I say! - boring. Arbitrarily excluding them is a slap in the face to everyone who is LGBT, or has LGBT friends/family.

copmc wrote:
Whatever you do, make sure it is something that makes the playing experience better for everyone. If you are unsure then maybe it is best to avoid that here and search for another outlet for expressing those interests.

That's a cop out, plain and simple. Paizo should avoid things like gut-wrenching violence against children. And thinly veiled references to awful things in the real world (no need for the robe-wearing racists of the LLL, who terrorize and brutalize innocent... elves). Also, F.A.T.A.L. levels of pornographic hate-trash. But a gay or transgendered person? There is literally nothing offensive about such a character.


N. Jolly wrote:


Really, let the marginalized people have their parade with demanding 'equal treatment', since it's exactly what they haven't been getting.

I get so very tired of hearing that LGBTs are "shoving our sexuality down others' throats," or that we should "keep our sex lives private." Demanding legal equality and protection, or fair representation as actual people in media, is not a matter of flagrant exhibitionism. We are not brainwashing your children, barging into your living room and demanding your personal approval, or forcing you to get gay married. Except, perhaps, in the minds of the utterly intolerant.


Let's be fair here, the difference between what SRS is saying and what the others are saying is merely one of word choice (though words are important). If SRS sees 'acceptance' as 'grudging allowance of differences' and I see that as 'tolerance', then we're agreeing that it's a bad thing (though better than intolerance) whatever we choose to call it.


Generic Villain wrote:
That's a cop out, plain and simple. Paizo should avoid things like gut-wrenching violence against children. And thinly veiled references to awful things in the real world (no need for the robe-wearing racists of the LLL, who terrorize and brutalize innocent... elves). Also, F.A.T.A.L. levels of pornographic hate-trash. But a gay or transgendered person? There is literally nothing offensive about such a character.

Hiss...You dare speak of the game-that-must-not-be-named!?

In all seriousness though, when things like F.A.T.A.L are on the market, I cannot in any way see Pathfinder as offensive. For those who don't know, F.A.T.A.L. is the worst and most offensive tabletop RPG ever. Y'know those rapist, inbred, hillbilly Orges? F.A.T.A.L expects its PCs to act like that. A little homosexuality isn't that bad comparatively. Also I find it kinda funny that the most vile tabletop RPG on the market is so aggressively heterosexual and yet the comparatively tolerant Pathfinder is far less offensive. I don't remember anything explicitly homophobic in F.A.T.A.L. but it wouldn't surprise me if it was there and I missed it.

Speaking of those Ogres, how come that isn't an issue. A few harmless homosexual relationships is more evil than incestuous rape? Even the two Evil lesbians were at least in a consensual relationship (and weren't related.)

JiCi wrote:
SRS wrote:
Pathfinder has its share of LGBT characters, and homosexuality is something common in Golarion's society. The ONLY thing that you MIGHT wanna know about that is that LGBT characters aren't that numerous
So, "it's share" translates into "not that numerous"...

I thought all iconics were considered to be bisexual unless stated otherwise. And that Kyra, the iconic cleric, is an explicit lesbian. Please someone correct me if I'm wrong. I could only find secondhand sources.


N. Jolly wrote:
Kthulhu wrote:

" Appreciation is actually the positive word. "

I'll throw your "Congrats on being gay" parade a week.after I get my "Congrats on being straight" parade.

I'm not familiar with the lexicon and if this is a widely held belief in relation to appreciate and accept, that's actually something I'd like to research a bit.

But really, what doesn't celebrate being straight? It's basically celebrated in every straight romance, every advertisement made 'sexy' to the heterosexual idea of attraction, and really just about every media outlet that isn't specifically pro LGBT. Really, let the marginalized people have their parade with demanding 'equal treatment', since it's exactly what they haven't been getting.

I wouldn't call media bombardment a celebration. It's simply mass marketing that's appealing to a majority. Advertisments featuring hetero lifestyles are the... "generic" advertizments, so to speak. They're primarily directed at networks and shows that appeal to the majority.

Logo has advertisments that are directed at the LGBT community, because that's who primarily watches Logo. Though there are some straight people who watch Logo (myself included), I wouldn't expect any "straight" commercials on the netowrk just because I watch it. I'm not their primary audiance.


Larkos wrote:
Speaking of those Ogres, how come that isn't an issue. A few harmless homosexual relationships is more evil than incestuous rape? Even the two Evil lesbians were at least in a consensual relationship (and weren't related.)

Q: I think I missed part of this conversation. Is this a referance to somehting specific?

EDIT: I'd go back and read more, but I primarily post from work and don't always have time to do so.


Captain Wacky wrote:
Larkos wrote:
Speaking of those Ogres, how come that isn't an issue. A few harmless homosexual relationships is more evil than incestuous rape? Even the two Evil lesbians were at least in a consensual relationship (and weren't related.)

Q: I think I missed part of this conversation. Is this a referance to somehting specific?

EDIT: I'd go back and read more, but I primarily post from work and don't always have time to do so.

The Ogres are from

and the evil lesbians are
Spoiler:
the big bad and her bodyguard from Curse of the Crimson Throne.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Crimson Throne spoiler:
Sabina isn't actually evil though, just in love and horribly misguided. It's actually accounts for two plot twists: How Ileosa avoides detect evil and Sabina's dangerous attempt to join the PCs after their return to Korvosa.

She's a great "not a bad person, but has made some terrible choices" character. That along with the horribly messy love triangle where none involved could wind up happy made for a good chunk of the drama in that AP. :)


Ahh, I see now, thank you. I'd have to read them before putting in any real input. But as far as the Ogres are concerned, making them more viles makes them more fun to kill. Most of the ogres in my games are kinda like this anyhow.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

In regards to your spoiler, Mikaze,

Spoiler:

my character for Crimson Throne was Alvirah, Sabina's big sister, who was very concerned when Sabina stopped writing to her. Clearly, sister had to go find out what's what. :P


Mikaze wrote:
** spoiler omitted **

Yeah you're right. I was generalizing. One of them is still evil though and that ain't a secret.

Webstore Gninja Minion

Just a reminder that generalizing can lead to a lot of misunderstandings, particularly on a topic like this one. :-)


Pathfinder Adventure, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
SRS wrote:

Acceptance is actually a level of heterosexism. People accept things they have no control over but would change if they were to have control. The equates gayness with something unfortunate that one has to accept, like the death of a loved one.

Appreciation is actually the positive word....

Actually both words are positive... the difference is a matter of perspective and in some cases the preconceptions people bring (or carry) to the conversation.

Taking offence at someone else's life choice or relationship is juvenile... Why on earth would my PC's (or me IRL) care about where people find their happiness?

Even a word like 'tolerance ' is positive as it means someone is on the journey... (they may not be as far a long a you'd like) but tough, you can't hold other people to 'your ideals' or 'morals' any more than they should be caring what you do with your wiggly bits and your own partner.

If people were more 'accepting' then the world would be a better place.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lilith wrote:

In regards to your spoiler, Mikaze,

** spoiler omitted **

!

I remember hearing a bit about that...

Spoiler:
...and am a bit jealous. I wondered how things turned out after that. :)

There wasn't that strong a connection between her and the PCs in our game. The tightest ties they had to her were through Grau and Vencarlo and professional interactions early in the campaign.

She still provided some serious drama towards the end. She was allowed to take part in the liberation of Korvosa alongside her estranged friends and the PCs, but she was then placed under arrest(partly for her own protection) between the liberation and the final strike against Ileosa. When it became clear that much of the nobility would demand she be hanged for her part in everything, she was prepared to go to the gallows, asking only that her soldiers that she failed to protect, the Grey Maidens, would get the mercy and rehabilitation they deserved.(the party made good on that request too).

Vencarlo and Grau, however, were willing to do anything to make sure she got out of Korvosa alive, even if it meant treason. The party's rogue and Blackjack-inheritor got savvy to that and was preparing to join them after the final battle.

Eventually the party fighter/future king came up with a solution, she'd be exiled from Korvosa, the home she'd known and loved her entire life. But she'd also be charged to continue serving it, taking command of a large chunk of his followers to pursue humanitarian goals in Kaer Maga, where they had established a temporary base during the AP. And she'd be trusted with military command and given a chance to redeem herself, not just in Korvosa's eyes but more importantly in her own. She accepted those terms, and it probably saved the lives of the party rogue, Vencarlo, and Grau too.

When it was all wrapping up, Vencarlo visited the rogue one last time, handing over the keys to everything and admitting he was following Sabina to Kaer Maga for just a while, not because he had any illusions about any future together between them, but rather that after everything they had done to each other, he owed it to her to make sure she landed on her feet. After that, whereever the wind took him.

Looking forward to bringing both of those characters back in Shattered Star for the Crimson Throne alumni, even if just for a short while. :D

I just remembered how much I loved Crimson Throne. :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Riddle Scale by Dr. Dorothy Riddle, 1974-1994:

Homophobic and/or heterosexist attitudes:

Repulsion: Homosexuality is seen as a crime against nature. Gays/lesbians are considered sick, crazy, immoral, sinful, wicked, etc. Anything is justified to change them: incarceration, hospitalization, behavior therapy, electroshock therapy, etc.

Pity: Represents heterosexual chauvinism. Heterosexuality is considered more mature and certainly to be preferred. It is believed that any possibility of becoming straight should be reinforced, and those who seem to be born that way should be pitied as less fortunate ("the poor dears").

Tolerance: Homosexuality is viewed as a phase of adolescent development that many people go through and most people grow out of. Thus, lesbians/gays are less mature than straights and should be treated with the protectiveness and indulgence one uses with children who are still maturing. It is believed that lesbians/gays should not be given positions of authority because they are still working through their adolescent behavior.

Acceptance: Still implies that there is something to accept; the existing climate of discrimination is ignored. Characterized by such statements as "You're not lesbian to me, you're a person." or "What you do in bed is your own business." or "That's fine with me as long as you don't flaunt it."

Positive attitude levels:

Support: People at this level may be uncomfortable themselves, but they are aware of the homophobic climate and the irrational unfairness, and work to safeguard the rights of lesbians and gays.

Admiration: It is acknowledged that being lesbian/gay in our society takes strength. People at this level are willing to truly examine their homophobic attitudes, values, and behaviors.

Appreciation: The diversity of people is considered valuable and lesbians/gays are seen as a valid part of that diversity. People on this level are willing to combat homophobia in themselves and others.

Nurturance: Assumes that gay/lesbian people are indispensable in our society. People on this level view lesbians/gays with genuine affection and delight, and are willing to be their allies and advocates.

-------

Quote:

The Riddle scale is an eight-term uni-dimensional Likert-type interval scale with nominal labels and no explicit zero point. Each term is associated with a set of attributes and beliefs; individuals are assigned a position on the scale based on the attributes they exhibit and beliefs they hold.

Riddle's analysis has been credited for pointing out that although 'tolerance' and 'acceptance' are frequently treated as if they are positive attitudes, they should actually be seen as negative because they often mask underlying opprobrium. This observation generalizes to attitude evaluations in other areas besides sexual orientation and is one of the strengths of Riddle's study.

The scale has been criticized for presenting a clearly hierarchical set of negative attitudes (from most severe to least severe) while presenting a less distinctly different set of positive attitudes.

As a psychometric scale, the Riddle scale has been considered to have acceptable face validity but its exact psychometric properties are unknown.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Kthulhu wrote:

" Appreciation is actually the positive word. "

I'll throw your "Congrats on being gay" parade a week.after I get my "Congrats on being straight" parade.

Take a look at what the word minority means. Also, take a look at the following fallacies: false dilemma, false equivalence, and red herring.

Ask yourself how many teenage suicides there have been because of harassment over being heterosexual in the last thirty years, for a start, as well.

Let me know how many states refuse to recognize the marriages of heterosexuals with the argument that opposite-sex marriage is wrong.

And, let me know how many countries like Russia, Uganda, and India have recently criminalized heterosexuality, with fun things like imprisonment and execution.

Shadow Lodge

Deadmanwalking wrote:


Remco Sommeling wrote:
As much as I accept gay people I accept that people are not always entirely comfortable with it.

No, they aren't. But why depart from realism to cater to prejudiced people? That seems a silly thing to do.

YES!!! Exactly this. Catering to prejudice is silly. Not just silly, but it is enabling of the prejudice. Why should we enable prejudice against ourselves? I can't think of anything sillier.

Going back into lurker mode for another few years while I try to finish reading the entire thread.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
SRS wrote:

Riddle Scale by Dr. Dorothy Riddle, 1974-1994:

Homophobic and/or heterosexist attitudes:

Repulsion: Homosexuality is seen as a crime against nature. Gays/lesbians are considered sick, crazy, immoral, sinful, wicked, etc. Anything is justified to change them: incarceration, hospitalization, behavior therapy, electroshock therapy, etc.

Pity: Represents heterosexual chauvinism. Heterosexuality is considered more mature and certainly to be preferred. It is believed that any possibility of becoming straight should be reinforced, and those who seem to be born that way should be pitied as less fortunate ("the poor dears").

Tolerance: Homosexuality is viewed as a phase of adolescent development that many people go through and most people grow out of. Thus, lesbians/gays are less mature than straights and should be treated with the protectiveness and indulgence one uses with children who are still maturing. It is believed that lesbians/gays should not be given positions of authority because they are still working through their adolescent behavior.

Acceptance: Still implies that there is something to accept; the existing climate of discrimination is ignored. Characterized by such statements as "You're not lesbian to me, you're a person." or "What you do in bed is your own business." or "That's fine with me as long as you don't flaunt it."

While useful as an evaluative scale, perhaps, I think this has more potential to confuse the discussion with a debate over semantics rather than anything else. While the word "acceptance" might have a specific (somewhat technical) meaning to you, as someone familiar with the Riddle Scale, that doesn't mean that it carries a negative connotation when used by others (nor does it put a ceiling on one's attitude towards non-heterosexuality; I probably fall somewhere in the Appreciation level of the Riddle Scale, but I would truthfully be able to say that I have tolerance, acceptance, support, or admiration for LGBT individuals, as well).


Well, Uganda is the African country where the Roman Catholic Church has been most successful. It has been held up, time and time again, as the poster child for what abstinence-only work against HIV can do. Apparently they have some (or try to make it sound as if they have some) results there worth showing.

And they are executing gay people. Draw your own conclusions. I will draw mine.

Silver Crusade Assistant Software Developer

3 people marked this as a favorite.

We should really stick to the topic at hand.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
SRS wrote:
This is contradictory because a person's orientation is generally known publicly unless that person actively tries to hide it, in which case the person is relying on the assumption of heterosexuality (the assumption that anyone is heterosexual until proven otherwise). That assumption is usually couched with what I call "gay invisibility rhetoric" which is the argument that gayness is always irrelevant (impolite, distracting, unwanted, personal).

In our societies, a lot of people DO hide it. It's a learned survival reflex because of how much intolerant crazy is still out there. I was married almost a decade to my spouse, before he came out to me about his transgendered nature. In retrospect, there were possible clues that I might have picked on, but no somoking gun until his revelation to me.

And with all apologies to Dr. Riddle, situations like that put new dimension on the acceptance scale.


Sissyl wrote:

Well, Uganda is the African country where the Roman Catholic Church has been most successful. It has been held up, time and time again, as the poster child for what abstinence-only work against HIV can do. Apparently they have some (or try to make it sound as if they have some) results there worth showing.

And they are executing gay people. Draw your own conclusions. I will draw mine.

Do you mean to say they are saying abstinence as a cure for HIV? Is that it?


Captain Wacky wrote:
Sissyl wrote:

Well, Uganda is the African country where the Roman Catholic Church has been most successful. It has been held up, time and time again, as the poster child for what abstinence-only work against HIV can do. Apparently they have some (or try to make it sound as if they have some) results there worth showing.

And they are executing gay people. Draw your own conclusions. I will draw mine.

Do you mean to say they are saying abstinence as a cure for HIV? Is that it?

More that abstinence is the best way to avoid transmission and thus the spread of HIV. Which is of course true.

The problem is that "abstinence-only" programs don't seem to produce a lot of actual abstinence and also decrease the use of other methods.

Near as I can tell from a quick glance, Uganda was doing pretty well by African standards against AIDS until they shifted to the abstinence-only approach and have gotten much worse since. I'm not sure what result Sissyl's talking about.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Scott Betts wrote:


SRS wrote:


Riddle Scale by Dr. Dorothy Riddle, 1974-1994:

Homophobic and/or heterosexist attitudes:

Repulsion: Homosexuality is seen as a crime against nature. Gays/lesbians are considered sick, crazy, immoral, sinful, wicked, etc. Anything is justified to change them: incarceration, hospitalization, behavior therapy, electroshock therapy, etc.

Pity: Represents heterosexual chauvinism. Heterosexuality is considered more mature and certainly to be preferred. It is believed that any possibility of becoming straight should be reinforced, and those who seem to be born that way should be pitied as less fortunate ("the poor dears").

Tolerance: Homosexuality is viewed as a phase of adolescent development that many people go through and most people grow out of. Thus, lesbians/gays are less mature than straights and should be treated with the protectiveness and indulgence one uses with children who are still maturing. It is believed that lesbians/gays should not be given positions of authority because they are still working through their adolescent behavior.

Acceptance: Still implies that there is something to accept; the existing climate of discrimination is ignored. Characterized by such statements as "You're not lesbian to me, you're a person." or "What you do in bed is your own business." or "That's fine with me as long as you don't flaunt it."

While useful as an evaluative scale, perhaps, I think this has more potential to confuse the discussion with a debate over semantics rather than anything else. While the word "acceptance" might have a specific (somewhat technical) meaning to you, as someone familiar with the Riddle Scale, that doesn't mean that it carries a negative connotation when used by others (nor does it put a ceiling on one's attitude towards non-heterosexuality; I probably fall somewhere in the Appreciation level of the Riddle Scale, but I would truthfully be able to say that I have tolerance, acceptance, support, or admiration for LGBT individuals, as well).

Scott has it right here. Unless everyone accepts Dr. Riddle's definitions, is familiar with her scale and uses the terms as she has defined them it's pretty much a waste. And while I appreciate what she was trying to do, her use of English... *sigh* When people begin redefining common English usage terms and turning them into a jargon that other's are not familiar with you have problems in just communicating.

Shadow Lodge

Fine, SRS. I no longer accept homosexuals. Happy now?

:P


This is something I found that says a bit about how the RCC sees Uganda's HIV situation.

Of course, now it seems to be rising again, and previous data is being challenged. Jury's still out, but it seems to me the RCC has had too much influence.


Sissyl wrote:

This is something I found that says a bit about how the RCC sees Uganda's HIV situation.

Of course, now it seems to be rising again, and previous data is being challenged. Jury's still out, but it seems to me the RCC has had too much influence.

Despite the Church's influence, the campaign included condoms until emphasis changed around 2003. That's when it really became abstinence only.

It's not surprising that rates continued to drop for awhile and have since gone back up. That's what you'd expect from the fading influence of education programs.

And it's not just the Catholic Church. American evangelicals have a good deal of influence there as well.


Scott Betts wrote:
While useful as an evaluative scale, perhaps, I think this has more potential to confuse the discussion with a debate over semantics rather than anything else. While the word "acceptance" might have a specific (somewhat technical) meaning to you, as someone familiar with the Riddle Scale, that doesn't mean that it carries a negative connotation when used by others (nor does it put a ceiling on one's attitude towards non-heterosexuality

This isn't logical. Familiarity with the Riddle Scale doesn't transform the word into something else. It clarifies what it actually is.

People buy into a lot of euphemisms like "ethnic cleansing", but that doesn't mean those things aren't highly problematic. People may think they're being positive when they use the word acceptance but that doesn't mean they truly are.

I've heard many people try to argue that "that's so gay" isn't an anti-gay expression, for instance. Their argument is that the word gay now means bad so it's not anti-gay, even though the entire reason the word is now taken to mean bad is due to anti-gay animus.

And, another example of problematic terminology that influences people without being pressured the way it should be is the word gay itself. For one thing, it embeds a false heterosexist dichotomy of good vs. bad (straight arrow vs. bent arrow). Just because terminology is popular and used without much thought doesn't mean it doesn't carry negative consequences. If people subconsciously associate gayness with brokenness due to the term (and the gay vs. "straight" dichotomy), then that's not good.

R_Chance wrote:
Scott has it right here. Unless everyone accepts Dr. Riddle's definitions, is familiar with her scale and uses the terms as she has defined them it's pretty much a waste. And while I appreciate what she was trying to do, her use of English... *sigh* When people begin redefining common English usage terms and turning them into a jargon that other's are not familiar with you have problems in just communicating.

There is no redefining happening. Instead there is an uncomfortable clarification that threatens expressions of heterosexual chauvinism. People may enjoy saying they accept people because it makes them feel like they're being benevolent, but it's a condescending thing to do at best.

Again, as the scale points out, people accept things they can't control, like someone accepts the fact that their friend is dying of cancer.

There is simply no need to say you accept someone for being gay unless you're also saying that you would have them not be. Otherwise, you would use one of the positive words Riddle presents to show your positive feelings.

Shadow Lodge

Generic Villain wrote:
I get so very tired of hearing that LGBTs are "shoving our sexuality down others' throats," or that we should "keep our sex lives private."

Then perhaps demanding that acceptance isn't enough, and that I must "delight" in your sexual preference, else I'm discriminating isn't the way to go.

Paizo Employee Developer

3 people marked this as a favorite.

The last 14 posts have had nothing to do with Golarion. Please keep this on topic, as Lissa reminded everyone earlier this morning.

Silver Crusade

5 people marked this as a favorite.

So with Shelyn almost confirmed as being a big deal in Vudra, considering her servitors, one has to wonder if a Kama Sutra-analogue might be heavily influenced by her and her allies. Possibly being more equal, inclusive, and safer to boot.

Which then leads to some wondering about how that book combined with Vudra's(and Jalmeray by extension) stratified caste system might lead to different mindsets concerning romance and sexuality compared to the Inner Sea, neighboring Casmaron(the probable birthplace of the Iridian Fold?), and RL India. If such a book were given such importance, that is.

resists temptation to suggest "Indian Terre D’Ange"

edit-and now I can't stop thinking about that

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
SRS wrote:
I've heard many people try to argue that "that's so gay" isn't an anti-gay expression, for instance. Their argument is that the word gay now means bad so it's not anti-gay, even though the entire reason the word is now taken to mean bad is due to anti-gay animus.

I think that using the phrase, 'Thats so gay!', as a disparaging term, is vile. However, your argument is flawed.

Words do change meaning. 'Gay' used to mean 'happy' only 50 years ago (and still can), so it's mistaken to think it can't change it's meaning again.

What slang will Golarion use in place of LGBT or QUILTBAG or whatever? We don't know, we don't have to know, but we must assume that our terms will have Golarion equivalents just as we assume that English does, with all the weird etymology of it's vocabulary.

Our defence against mis-using the word 'gay' in a vile way is not to bury our heads in the sand and pretend the meaning of words don't evolve, but to simply not accept that phrase's use because it is simply vile when used that way.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I can't believe this thread is still going.

Not because it's not an important social issue, but because l find it staggering that people think they can convince others to change their value set (any value set) on a forum board.

Homosexuality in Golarion

1) Golarion is a fictional world that you visit with your friends, presumably people with similar values. You decide the importance and prevalence of sexuality or any other aspect of the campaign you wish.

2) Don't expect validation of any of your values (sexual or otherwise) in a generic fantasy product produced by other people. If it's so damned important to you, produce your own material, publish and market.

3) be thankful that we have a game we love and a company that promotes and produces quality material that grows the industry. Paizo should be lauded for everything they have done for the industry as a whole, rather than critically focussing on one area you believe is not being represented to your satisfaction.

Tark

Project Manager

Mikaze wrote:

resists temptation to suggest "Indian Terre D’Ange"

edit-and now I can't stop thinking about that

Yes plz.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kthulhu wrote:

Then perhaps demanding that acceptance isn't enough, and that I must "delight" in your sexual preference, else I'm discriminating isn't the way to go.

What part of "legal equality and fair media presentation" struck you as a personal command to "delight in [my] sexual preference"? This has nothing to do with you whatsoever.

Regarding fair media representation, Paizo is an open-minded and progressive company that contributes towards it. Why should Kthulhu's personal opinion matter one whit to me when I can crack open the latest Pathfinder Adventure Path volume and read about interesting, cool, well thought-out gay characters? And transgendered characters? And characters that don't really fit in any particular box?

This isn't about you at all, so quit trying to make it seem like there are demands being placed on you. Paizo celebrates diversity with its work, and that means infinitely more to me than any one person's opinion (except for maybe that of the president or individual Supreme Court Justices).


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

The "acceptance" viewpoint is potentially valuable, but targeting the word "acceptance" is overly broad. A number of definitions of acceptance (including "approval") are explicitly positive.

Silver Crusade

Jessica Price wrote:
Mikaze wrote:

resists temptation to suggest "Indian Terre D’Ange"

edit-and now I can't stop thinking about that

Yes plz.

Spoiler:
Well, some of the aesthetics of such a thing may have found their way into an upcoming piece of art. When the artist suggested it, it seemed a perfect fit. Now, even moreso. :)

(she's knocking it out of the park too)

5,351 to 5,400 of 5,778 << first < prev | 103 | 104 | 105 | 106 | 107 | 108 | 109 | 110 | 111 | 112 | 113 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Lost Omens Campaign Setting / General Discussion / Homosexuality in Golarion All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.