Oh, I don't think I missed something. Here. Let me pull a direct quote for you.
Too much overt sexuality is just plain tacky. This is Pathfinder, not Pornfinder. :) I don't want porn, I don't want a boddice ripper, and I don't want 'naughty fantasy.'
Yes, and there is NO MENTION OF HOMOSEXUALITY IN THAT QUOTE. NOTHING.
It is from a response to another poster. Try reading the posts in order. It will help you undertand what's going on with the conversation. If you take things out of context, you may become confused.
Settle down, Beavis. Can't we just all have a happy ending? You've won the Internet. Have a Pabst Blue Ribbon.
Settle down, Beavis. Can't we just all have a happy ending?
Name-calling, heh?
I'm not impressed by you.
Settle down, Beavis. Can't we just all have a happy ending? You've won the Internet. Have a Pabst Blue Ribbon.
You've won the 'I can't read very well' contest. Have an Olympia.
Settle down, Beavis. Can't we just all have a happy ending?Name-calling, heh?
I'm not impressed by you.
Hey, I can't read English.
Hey, I can't read English.Settle down, Beavis. Can't we just all have a happy ending?Name-calling, heh?
I'm not impressed by you.
Well, I get the impression that you are having difficulty comprehending plain English when you interpret my explicit approval of the current approach to homosexuality in Paizo products as an objection.
Well, you can't read it well.Hey, I can't read English.Settle down, Beavis. Can't we just all have a happy ending?Name-calling, heh?
I'm not impressed by you.
You mean to say:
You can't read it well.
I figured the duplication of the same word in your sentence may have been redundant use of grammar. But I'm told I can't read English.
Well.
But enough of this. Let's get back to finding homosexuality in Golarion.
I hope there's plenty. I like squeamish. :)
Gregg, I've sent you messages via Facebook. Please read them.
P.S. Sending me disparaging comments to my FB account is poor tact, sir. Obviously I struck a nerve for you to personally stalk me outside of Paizo. For a guy who doesn't like his role playing games with overt sexuality, you sure have no trouble with puerile comments sent via private messaging. Given the comments about my dog, what would be your reaction if I were to return similar color commentary involving your wife?
Just because we disagree on positions doesn't imbue you with the right to do what you did. Total Buzz Killington.
P.S. Sending me disparaging comments to my FB account is poor tact, sir. Obviously I struck a nerve for you to personally stalk me outside of Paizo. For a guy who doesn't like his role playing games with overt sexuality, you sure have no trouble with puerile comments sent via private messaging. Given the comments about my dog, what would be your reaction if I were to return similar color commentary involving your wife?
Just because we disagree on positions doesn't imbue you with the right to do what you did. Total Buzz Killington.
Please read the other two messages, Gregg. It's not that there are positions that we disagree about, it the way we are treating one another here at Paizo. Yes, I can admit that it's a mutual problem. I've made bad decisions about how to handle you, as you have made bad decisions about how to handle me.
Yes, you've annoyed me. It seems like that's been your intention all along, but maybe I've read you wrong? Let's deal with this offsite.
|
Ewan, I understand that this issue (along with the ‘cheesecake’ one) is something that you feel strongly about, and from your point of view it probably appears very much that you are being jumped on and attacked for presenting your reasonable and non-extreme opinion.
I would like to point out that your argument and opinion are perhaps not so clear (or clearly presented) as you perhaps think they are. You have specifically stated that:
The best approach is to continue what Paizo is doing now: don't spend too much time or energy on politically charged topics and just keep putting out quality gaming resources for people who like D&D/PF.
However, how much time and energy on such topics is ‘too much’ is of course subjective. Some people in this thread have pretty much expressed that they do think Paizo currently (or previously) spends ‘too much’ time and energy on politically charged topics. Obviously this is not your opinion ... however, omewhat further confusing the presentation of your stance, you write things like;
Describing a brothel and the whores who work there is fine if the brothel is actually part of the adventure. If it's just local color, it needs only a passing mention, at the most.
and
I think that it's fine to have the occasional mention of an NPC being a homosexual, if there is some in-game, story related reason for mentioning his sexual orientation.
The fact is there are instances in Paizo’s flag-ship product, the Adventure Paths (and almost certainly other Paizo products too) where brothels and whores who work there have been described although they do not form a significant part of the story and instances where NPC's sexual orientation (both homo- and hetero- sexual) are mentioned even though there is no real in-game story related reason for mentioning it.
Given that you specifically state you don’t like or prefer these things, but you also say that you approve of Paizo’s approach, you can see where the confusion might arise.
Given that you specifically state you don’t like or prefer these things, but you also say that you approve of Paizo’s...
Fair enough, Mothman. I approve of the current overall direction and approach in regards to homosexual NPCs. That much was made very clear in my post.
In a more general sense, I do think that Paizo has done a good job of walking the line between too much sexual content and none at all. That's not a comment on every single instance of sexual content, but my endorsement of the overall handling of such things.
Cheesecake, while related, is not the same issue as the written content. I like the written content very much, taken on the whole.
I'm put off by some of the T&A art, because I find it goofy and unappealing.
At one time I think topic may have been considered as taboo as discussing religion or politics. Times change, that's for sure. Not to sound offensive, sexuality of either a hetero or homo nature should be something that should be relegated to minimal background fluff at best.
I'm not offended.
I find that the occasional romantic subplot, whore, sultry temptress, flirtatious barmaid, etc are all well and good so long as these elements aren't overused or overdone. There's no need to get graphic about sex in the books. I haven't seen too much of that, though, so I'm happy enough with things as they are in the writing department.
Spartacus: Blood & Sand/Gods of the Arena. That's pretty much most of my games in level, type and intensity of sex and violence. Of course, I don't use Golarion, but still...
Spartacus: Blood & Sand/Gods of the Arena. That's pretty much most of my games in level, type and intensity of sex and violence. Of course, I don't use Golarion, but still...
Still haven't seen that show. Your commentary on it earlier was rather off-putting. :)
Still haven't seen that show. Your commentary on it earlier was rather off-putting. :)
Best show on television.
Still haven't seen that show. Your commentary on it earlier was rather off-putting. :)Best show on television.
I think I can do without 'dudes kissing.' Or were you really joking?
I think I can do without 'dudes kissing.' Or were you really joking?
No, I wasn't joking. It's ancient Rome. Some of the male characters are gay or bi-, and they don't shy from showing it. Some of the female characters are as well, and they don't shy from showing that, either.
I think I can do without 'dudes kissing.' Or were you really joking?No, I wasn't joking. It's ancient Rome. Some of the male characters are gay or bi-, and they don't shy from showing it. Some of the female characters are as well, and they don't shy from showing that, either.
Yeah, then I'm definitely not interested.
Yeah, then I'm definitely not interested.
Too each his own. It's a great show, great characters, great drama, great writing, fantastic fight scenes, and some of the most wonderfully original swearing ever. My wife and I are always eager for the next new episode.
Yeah, then I'm definitely not interested.To each his own. It's a great show, great characters, great drama, great writing, fantastic fight scenes, and some of the most wonderfully original swearing ever. My wife and I are always eager for the next new episode.
Yeah, I'm not going to watch dudes making out, even for good writing and good fight scenes. Haha.
The swearing cannot possibly beat that featured in Deadwood. :)
Yeah, I'm not going to watch dudes making out, even for good writing and good fight scenes. Haha.
The swearing cannot possibly beat that featured in Deadwood. :)
But the girls making out would be ok? Just curious.
But the girls making out would be ok? Just curious.Yeah, I'm not going to watch dudes making out, even for good writing and good fight scenes. Haha.
The swearing cannot possibly beat that featured in Deadwood. :)
Are they ugly?
LOL, maybe we should be discussing this in another venue.
:)
LOL, maybe we should be discussing this in another venue.
:)
I actually think this is the right venue. I brought up the show because I think it's a great example of gay/bi- portrayals in a genre setting. You stated that, based on my description of the show, you wouldn't want to watch it because of the
dudes making out
When I inquired if it would be ok to watch it if it were just the girls making out, you replied with
Are they ugly?
To me, that is the heart of a lot of issues, and it is a huge double standard that is especially prevelant here in the US, but does show up worldwide, and that is: 2 Chicks Making Out = AW RITE! HAWT! but 2 Guys Making Out = Ewwww! Gross!!!
To me, that is the heart of a lot of issues, and it is a huge double standard that is especially prevelant here in the US, but does show up worldwide, and that is: 2 Chicks Making Out = AW RITE! HAWT! but 2 Guys Making Out = Ewwww! Gross!!!
The mod wants us back on topic. If you want to dicuss this further, please open a thread in the appropriate forum.
-Ewan
Are there non-humanoid gay sentients in Golarion (e.g., aboleths, dragons, serpentfolks, etc.)?
Flumph is pretty gay.
|
Fear not, fellow liberal Americans, the Federal Republic of Europe rushes to your aid with our take on the subject!
|
I think Paizo was been fairly tame on the topic. Of course i thought the same way about cheese cake. Yes both exist but I consider them pretty tame level of them. Of this topic i would like to see a bit more. Not just LGBT, but even if it is even in passing for anyone. mentioning who a NPC may or may not be interested in of other NPC's.
Before anyone says it, yes I am aware I can do it myself and do. I find little details help bring NPC's to life. I put it up there with, Robert loves to hunt and can often be found out in tickwoods hunting. To me all those little details are the same.
I run a very, very gritty, realistic and grim Greyhawk campaign, and my character regularly look after brothels after adventuring. We agreed out it was a very common and accepted thing compared to modern world, and not considered degradation at all. They don't have Christianity in the Flanaess as well, so relativism on these concepts should be permeating the whole world.
I regularly introduce hot topics like torture, death of relatives, rape, child abuse and whatever kind of strong topics without pulling punches. We all like it this way.
Other factors like homosexuality, starvation, genocides, racism, pedophilia, are also common in our adventures. We ruled out all elves are bisexual, for instance.
I personally find it great Paizo is not pulling punches either when facing these topics. They might be disturbing, but the world isn't nice either.
As for the Cheliax thing, I wonder why Cheliax should be oppressive on sexual behaviors. Christianity has been oppressive in this regard in the past (I would argue it's not entirely over it even today), but a devil worshiping empire should embrace every kind of mockery of structured "good" and cosmic laws. Being devils some kind of fallen angels too, I think it is more probable that the old Aroden church suppressed homosexuality while Asmodeus encourages it. I am not judging homosexuality as evil, but just considering that the Catholic Church sees it as somehow opposed to our standard concept of "natural family" and as such I would relate Aroden with the Catholic Church and Diabolical religion as something opposed to that. Sodomy for instance, should be encouraged by Cheliaxian government, as should euthanasia and abortion.
As for the Cheliax thing... I think it is more probable that the old Aroden church suppressed homosexuality while Asmodeus encourages it.
I disagree.
My take on it is that Aroden would be inclusive of everyone, but Asmodeus is a tyrant and would want to make sure there were laws in place to oppress the people. If we accept that the majority of the population is heterosexual Asmodeus would want to make sure that he was oppressing enough minorities that the majority thought he was tough but at least he wasn't being as tough on them as he was those poor gays/foreigners/halflings.
I would say that modern Cheliax culture is strongly focused on both power and keeping proper social forms, in this case hierarchy and sexuality viewed strictly through the world view of being dominant or dominated. It would probably be illegal for higher station male to be sexually submissive to male of lower station and also illegal for lower station man to be dominant. All Cheliaxians should know their place in greater order of things, after all, and be punished for breaking it.
In comparison I think that Talador would expect higher standing males to be dominant and being know as submissive would be social stigma of sorts without actual criminalization of such relations.
(actually for both cultures I was basing upon Roman laws and customs, with Talador being more focused on keeping the forms due to social acceptance and with more tolerance while modern Cheliax takes the Talador view to extreme due to devils' tampering).
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
I would say that modern Cheliax culture is strongly focused on both power and keeping proper social forms, in this case hierarchy and sexuality viewed strictly through the world view of being dominant or dominated. It would probably be illegal for higher station male to be sexually submissive to male of lower station and also illegal for lower station man to be dominant. All Cheliaxians should know their place in greater order of things, after all, and be punished for breaking it.
In comparison I think that Talador would expect higher standing males to be dominant and being know as submissive would be social stigma of sorts without actual criminalization of such relations.
(actually for both cultures I was basing upon Roman laws and customs, with Talador being more focused on keeping the forms due to social acceptance and with more tolerance while modern Cheliax takes the Talador view to extreme due to devils' tampering).
Interesting take.
My Taldor
In my Taldor, station and duty come before all else. You can be a commoner topping nobles in the backroom, but by all means don't act like you're above your station when others see you. (of course the submissive noble wouldn't be seen soiling his hands beating a commoner, that's what footmen are for). Likewise with sexuality. You may be a baronette who likes women, but when it comes to arranged marriages and childbirth "close your eyes and think of Iomadae." No one is going to bat an eye if you have a mistress on the side (or several) as long as their all appropriate, but your house and family come first.
The commoners are more 'traditional'. Monogamous, large families, etc. While the 'townies' live in cramped conditions, and are envious of the wide open spaces of the serfs, the serfs are envious of the (percieved) safety of city walls and the less opressive nobles.
In my Taldor, the issue with Princess Eutropia isn't her ursurping her father's position, it's that she 'should get married and produce an heir' Again appearances are everything. It doesn't matter if the new Emperor is a milksop being ruled by his wife, or even a child and his mother is 'Regent' As long as there's a male on the throne, everything is 'normal'.
Way off tangent: One thing I wanted to see touched on with Caprica was the contradiction in that the Polythesists were monogamous, but the monotheists were polyamourous.
Back on Tangent: Sam and Larry in Caprica are really how I like to see same sex couples portrayed. Just being there. no fanfare, no bells and whistles, just part of the way of life. Same thing with Sister Clarice's family.
|
Anyway, to get back towards the topic at hand.
I think the reason the writers tend to put evil as being more restrictive in regards towards sexuality is a reflection of our modern morals. Leaving real world historical comparisons out of it, today we are far more tolerant of what in the past would have been regarded as "deviant" behavior. It's the same as the slavery issue, although historically slavery was not viewed as evil, except by the slaves themselves, today we regard it such, so in our fantasy we tend towards only the evil cultures endorsing it.
Anyway, it's early and I'm sorry if this comes across rambling. :P
|
|
I also enjoy how paizo has handled the whole homosexuality in fantasy issue. I see Taldor very much like Rome. So I see homosexuality much as Matthew Morris has said. Homosexuality is extremely common among the nobility, and I would even dare say among the merchant classes as well. But duty to family and producing an heir is still #1 priority, do what you have too.
@ Matthew Just fyi about homosexual behavior. I know what you mean about wanting a non stereotypical homosexual couple. Roughly 1 in 10 people are gay and I have found that roughly half of those that are gay, you would never be able to tell through personality alone. As in they are not effeminate. For example I am a football jock, I watch sports with the guys, I game every Tuesday night with D&D, I don't have a lisp and wear practical clothing but I have a husband. My Husband is a grad student in Biology, lives out of a tent 3 months out of the year on an uninhabited island studying seabirds (grows a huge beard and all :P), doesn't have a feminine lilt or lisp in his voice, and everyone around the department links him to one girl or another but he has a husband. I really think we are way to stereotyped in most media outlets.
Wow, I'm surprised this thread is still going.
Homosexuality: Do not care.
Sexual content in general: No further than rated R, please.