Jimquisition: Mass Effect 3 And The Case For A Gay Shepard

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 . . . 16 NEXT
 

Honestly, I have more of a problem with boning everything under the sun than I do what gender it is that's being boned. But then, I'm pretty open minded with my sexuality.

But Shepard is just following in James T. Kirk's footsteps.

Or if you look at the timelines, setting the bar for Kirk.

Alrocsmash:

Grey Day for Elcia:

Alrocsmash:
Homosexuality exists in over 450 animal species. Homophobia exists in only one. Which one seems more unnatural now?

People need to grow up.

That's a very poor defense. Thumbs exist in only one animal species too.

Actually supposable exist in about 8. That can grow if you include prehensile feet. Grow about 15 years older then speak to me. Also isn't it ironic, those species with those thumbs out compete others. It's obvious you are REALLY young. A 10 second google search disproves your post. As as I said in my OP, grow up.

I was clearly referring to the useful kind--the kind only found in a handful of species.

In your rush to starwman you missed the point just about as hard as one possibly could. It should have been fairly obvious I suggesting any argument centered around "but other animals don't" is inane.

If we are going to go ahead and use the "unnatural" defense, I suppose the following should be removed:

courts and law
broad sexual equality
age of consent
currency
the education system (schools)
clothing
democracy;
government
etc.
etc.

It's just a flat out pointless argument. I'm reminded of a pretty funny bit a stand up comedian did:

Anti-homosexuality activist - "Animals don't have gays." [Ignore the fact that we are animals and that other animals are gay, just for the sake of making fun of this person, lol.]
Comedian - "You wanna judge what is and isn't normal based off what animals do? Maybe next time I see your wife I'll drop down on all fours and fuck her leg."

It's a bad argument. Don't do it, people.

- http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/6.353118.14013347

You want to use that to justify homosexuality (which doesn't need justifying) and you cannot argue against if if someone was to say "no other species on Earth has laws against having sex with their young, so it's unnatural that we do".

Ok, so far you've offered a terrible argument and attempted to insult me by saying I am a child.

You're not bringing much to the table here in this debate.

Callate:

jessegeek:

Callate:
It appears that human bisexuality, at least among men, isn't all that common.

Right, like how it isn't all that common for one person to stand up against the Geth army to defend the galaxy. You're right, those things are so super-rare, I don't know why they even put them in games: it just breaks immersion for me completely.

Way to miss the point.

[Edited for relevance]

Whether it's Beowulf slaying Grendel or Shepherd reclaiming Earth from an evil alien force, these stories are familiar to us, and don't need explanation. Is it unlikely that one man would be largely responsible for defeating a force that has eaten galaxy-spanning civilizations? Does that portrayal minimize the contributions millions of fictional people would make towards making such a victory possible, or realistically believable? Yes, but we're familiar with the conventions, and we don't dwell on it; we enjoy hearing about heroes, believing we could be heroes, stepping into the shoes of heroes, in the case of games.

[Edited again.] Science fiction can be heroic, of course, but that's not usually it's only purpose. Science fiction reflects upon, and comments upon, the reality we live in today. Mass Effect does this, too. When we hear some people grumble about the quarians, it very much reflects the attitudes we see toward "migrant" peoples, whether the Romany in Europe or the Latino workers who do so much of the farming in the United States. When Shepherd decides whether to reprogram or destroy the Geth, it brings up questions of the rehabilitation or execution of criminals in our own society. Even the faster-than-light travel, so much a staple of science fiction, reasonably asks the question "what would being able to access a million worlds to to a people"... A question Mass Effect also tries to answer, albeit often in ways that are fairly subtle.

So when you talk about prevalent bisexuality breaking immersion for me, you're missing the point. In the culture I live in, and you live in, and most players of the game live in, human bisexuality, especially male human bisexuality, appears to be relatively rare. We make certain assumptions about things within the game world by extrapolating from what we know; the designers and writers know this. Hell, they anticipate it. :) If a Lieutenant started giving orders to an Admiral, or guns worked by microwaving people's internal organs rather than firing bullets, or children were expected to be independent and self-sustaining entities by the age of seven, we'd want an explanation. :)

Widely prevalent bisexuality would have a significant, real effect on human culture, just as faster-than-light travel would do. It deserves to be treated as such, not just hand-waved. I'm not saying that I would be averse to playing a game that did assume such a change in human culture, only that it's not an extrapolation one should make from our current status without explaining what brought it on.

Um, you just mistook sarcastic reductio ad adsurdum of your argument for me missing the point, which is interesting as you actually use this rhetorical device yourself in the passage of your post that I have marked out with smiley faces.

Your sound grasp of basic history, literature and the history of literature notwithstanding, your central argument still isn't supported by your own terms. I know this is stating the obvious but because male bisexuality is rare now, doesn't mean it doesn't exist now. Similarly, if male bisexuality is still rare in the Mass Effect universe, that still wouldn't mean that it was non-existent. Therefore, it is no great stretch of the imagination that one man and one member of his crew in a vast galaxy could be both male and bisexual.

However, I'm aware that your main gripe seems to be with the idea of the cultural impact of practising male bisexuality within that universe. Allow me to level with you here. I am an archaeologist and anthropologist who both works and studies at Cambridge University, and one of my fields of expertise is sexuality and gender identity, so I have a degree of knowledge in that area. The resounding impact of the huge levels of male bisexuality in both the Grecian and Roman empires was very little. Pretty much the only noticeable sign of impact was less of a heterosexual bias in erotic art and literature, and the fact that no-one batted an eyelid if a man slept with a man or a woman. Therefore, it is entirely reasonable for the Mass Effect writers to have applied that same approach to the universe they created in their games. In fact, that actually seems to be the route they originally took; gay/bi love options were originally a part of the story, but were removed before release. All that was removed were the actual romantic interaction scenes. Nothing about the core make-up of the Mass Effect universe, or the themes explored within it, was changed by this.

There seems to be little else to say, save for one thing; at one point, you emphasised that I also lived in a culture where 'human bisexuality, especially male human bisexuality, appears to be relatively rare.' Firstly, that was incredibly presumptive; none of the three base meaning of the word 'culture' fulfil that criteria from my perspective. Needless to say, using something you don't know about a person as evidence for your point in a debate does not support or strength your argument in any way. Secondly, you then went on to justify this false belief with your reductio ad absurdum sentence. In context this isn't logical debating, as all of your examples were so bizarre that, in comparison, the concept of male bisexuality seemed even more mundane and normal than it already is.

Grey Day for Elcia:

wintercoat:

Grey Day for Elcia:
That's a very poor defense. Thumbs exist in only one animal species too.

Are you sure you want to make that assumption? Are you sure you don't want to maybe check that fact before you use it? Because I think you're hurting the giant panda's feelings with that comment. Not to mention most primates, possums and opossums, koalas, polydactyl cats, this one species of frog in South America. You get my drift.

Go ahead and check 309 before jumping on that sinking ship.

Umm, giant panda's are classified as having opposable thumbs. As are possum and opossum. Sure, you could make an argument against polydactyl cats, but seriously. Do research before you make claims. As other animals do have thumbs, you're argument comes off as weak. And again, you're making the giant panda sad. I'm pretty sure that's, like, a sin of some kind.

wintercoat:
-

Seeing as how you missed the message again, I'll quote the man and make it simple:

"You wanna judge what is and isn't normal based off what animals do? Maybe next time I see your wife I'll drop down on all fours and fuck her leg."

It's a bad argument. Don't do it, people.

ACman:

Grey Day for Elcia:

Alrocsmash:
Homosexuality exists in over 450 animal species. Homophobia exists in only one. Which one seems more unnatural now?

People need to grow up.

That's a very poor defense. Thumbs exist in only one animal species too.

HAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHA

okokok..... Monkeys. Ya? Monkeys.

Or Raccoons.

Or Possums.

Or Squirrels.

Do lemurs have thumbs too? I think they do. And I think "monkey" only covers a few of the primates, most of which have thumbs of a kind.

Edit: oh... FFFFFF.... forgot to read later posts. cra... Um... okay, um... Your body your choice? That's a very flexible argument, that can be applied to any situation. Full version is "Do what you want with your body, it's your choice, so long as I don't have to be caught up in your stuff if I don't want to".

Our free will makes everything posible. Everything we do is a choice, some chocies are nessisary, like the choice to eat and breathe, to not give in and hurl your self from the bridge, to want to be happy.

Other chocies, while apreaing nessisary, appeal only to the individual, such as choosing empolyment (if any), choosing a partner, perpetuating the species. These choices are manditory to the overall survival of culture, socioty, and humanity as a whole. Every individual contributes to the whole, no matter what their choice.

Culture, Socioty and humanity will all continue, changes as they may be from an individuals actions, to the individual, the chocie is a dramatic one, to the culture and socioty, it will generate an impact relevent to the first individuals social standing and the choices of other individuals.

As more individuals make more choices that fall our side of the social normal, the relative impact is reduced further and further until eventually they are rendered un-interesting to other individauls other than a foot-note. This is a place we are slowly reaching.

The choice you make in a video game is a considerably insignificant given the above.

Praise be to Jim, for he truly does good work.

easternflame:

mike1921:

easternflame:

It is not about biggotry, it about the inconsistency with the story and character. Remember in mass effect one where you had to kill Wrex (or convince him) because he wanted to save the facility for the survival of the species? He would have the utmost respect for the queen! why am I the only one to see this?!

Peoples' ideals don't always line up perfectly with their personalities. He could deep down respect the female Krogan and still want to be generally a dick to her. Just because he wants increased fertility so the species can breed doesn't mean he has entirely respectful interactions with female Krogan. It's not an assumption you can make and I see no reason this connection would be made.

You really think that's what the line reflects? Then explain to me this, if he had no other interaction with females before, and obviously not with other females from the other species' then why would he say that line? It makes no sense! He would A) not refer to her as a woman. And B) Would not know what to say in a situation like that.

Maybe he thinks the word "woman' IS respectfull... But I'm clutching straws her for the sake of someone elses argument so... *Wild Ze'roth flees*

thetruefallen:
Our free will makes everything posible. Everything we do is a choice, some chocies are nessisary, like the choice to eat and breathe, to not give in and hurl your self from the bridge, to want to be happy.

Determinism hates you :P

Now THAT is a debate no one will ever emerge victorious from.

Grey Day for Elcia:

wintercoat:
-

Seeing as how you missed the message again, I'll quote the man and make it simple:

"You wanna judge what is and isn't normal based off what animals do? Maybe next time I see your wife I'll drop down on all fours and fuck her leg."

It's a bad argument. Don't do it, people.

I'm not trying to hate, but literally NOTHING you have spoken disproves anything. Your edit. Your connection to what animals "do". You were dis proven rapidly by me, then edited your garbage post with more dribble that argued nothing relevant. Consent was never in this argument. Also Google female gorillas. There are videos of female gorillas with no food, and have sex with males who do. They trade sex for sustenance. Go back to school kiddie.

Therumancer:
Saying that homosexuals are somehow elevated above other sexual deviants is inherantly wrong, they are EXACTLY the same thing, just aroused by a differant abnormal trigger. Once you start saying homosexuals are entitled to representation, the same exact arguement can be made for ANY deviant using the same exact logic. It doesn't seem like an issue now, because nobody is using those arguements, but given time they will come, and with one deviation established as being accepted irregardless of the mainstream, it becomes increasingly difficult to say that others need to be singled out and excluded.

Every time you engage in a sexual act, even by yourself, that does not end in a child you are engaging in a deviant act. Using birth control and masturbation are obviously just as inherently wrong as everything else. In fact to maximize your breeding capability, and ensure you don't preform a deviant act, you should have many women ready to take your seed every time you engage in sexual acts. All sex should have been kept out of the game since its not for the purpose of breeding so its all deviant and you don't want to be deviant.

Edit: To avoid any further confusion this is satire. I don't believe that birth control and masturbation are wrong, or that men should line up women to maximize the breeding capacity of each sexual act. Sorry for the confusion.

ACman:

Therumancer:
I raised questions like those that are into scat, extreme BDSM, or other assorted things, many of which probably have heterosexuals involved in numbers globally that outnumber the entire population of homosexuals of both genders. If you start saying you HAVE to do this, which is what this comes down to, because Bioware made it pretty clear they didn't want to, it opens the door for any group that wants to make similar demands to come forward and do the same exact thing.

...., the thing that has made this an issue is the massive protests to FORCE them to put this kind of thing into the game, simply because they chose to do so before with other games.

You do know that Bioware wrote these choices into ME2? There are scenes on Youtube, cut from ME2, that amply demonstrate that. Now that they've tested the market with Dragon Age 2 and the world hasn't ended they probably feel safer including these themes.

And how in your deluded little mind (Now that "gayness" is "allowed") would they include bestiality, BDSM, scat or pedophilia into a PG/M rated computer game? Are they going to include dialogue options such as:

"Hey Garret, want to come shit on my face while I jerk off"

or

"Yeoman Kelly go cuff yourself to my table and assume the position."?

This issue is MUCH bigger than homosexuality,

No it isn't. It starts with sexuality and ends with sexuality and your obvious problems with anything that deviates from your hetero-normative world view.

and down the road if you decide to make complaints about extraneous characters or politics ruining something... anything, what your saying here could come back to haunt you. Being stuck in a position of trying to explain how forced inclusion in something else is a problem, when your saying it's okay with homosexuality isn't going to be easy to argue your way out of as once you start saying it's okay for one group it's hard to say it about others.

What are you trying to say here? That because we say that homosexuality is okay we have to say everything up to pedophilia is okay?

This is where your world view becomes truly disgusting. If you cannot separate sex acts between two (or more) consenting adults, (No matter how disgusting you might find them) and RAPE then you obviously have issues with mental clarity.

See, here is the problem. You insult me and suggest I be banned. Then you write this message insulting me, while presumably trying to bring up some counterpoints, albiet ones already covered to an extent in what I've already written.

I remain polite in these conversations, even when facing people getting rude with me, or whom I disagree with substantially. Re-write this to be polite and non-confrontational and I'll consider taking the time to respond.

Also in referance to your earlier message, your far more likely to wind up getting banned for personal attacks than I am for saying things that have come up before over a number of years. It's a general principle for me not to report people though, but still, on an open set of forums like this one if you can't learn to agree to disagree with people, even ones with positions you strongly oppose, your probably going to wind up eventually getting people who will make an issue of it, and the last thing you need is a pattern of behavior. Like it or not there is no requirement that you have to be politically correct or agree with socially liberal viewpoints. On the issue of gay rights I'm actually kind of a centrist as opposed to left or right wing (and tend to be disliked by both), but if I was a totally over the top bigot that would probably be cool too as long as I remained relatively civil about it (which isn't a factor since I generally am not, despite what you might think).

Alrocsmash:

Grey Day for Elcia:

wintercoat:
-

Seeing as how you missed the message again, I'll quote the man and make it simple:

"You wanna judge what is and isn't normal based off what animals do? Maybe next time I see your wife I'll drop down on all fours and fuck her leg."

It's a bad argument. Don't do it, people.

I'm not trying to hate, but literally NOTHING you have spoken disproves anything. Your edit. Your connection to what animals "do". You were dis proven rapidly by me, then edited your garbage post with more dribble that argued nothing relevant. Consent was never in this argument. Also Google female gorillas. They're are videos of female gorillas that no food, and have sex with males who do. They trade sex for sustenance. Go back to school kiddie.

It was originally stated that "no other species has homophobia" and that was given in evidence against homophobia in humans.

Take your insults back home and tell me then, with the previous accepted as fact for this argument, why the following line is not also therefore correct: "No other species has an age of consent. So humans shouldn't either." If it's okay to use homophobia not existing in others to condem it in Man, why is it not okay to use it in this example?

It's a weak argument. What other animals do or don't do is entirely irrelevant; it has no bearing whatsoever on what is 'right and wrong' in human society.

You know, I like dicks myself but I still don't like gay Shepard. It's not for any of the reasons you listed, it's just for the fact that the bioware writers kinda started sucking at making characters recently. I'd love it if they could make the characters better, or actually write the scenes better, but it's just bad.

jboking:

captainfluoxetine:

jboking:

Define what it is that makes homosexuality a mental illness. Define why, if homosexuality is a mental illness, heterosexuality can't be seen as a mental illness as well.

Heterosexuality makes babies. Homosexuality doesn't.

Frankly it IS, from an evolutionary point of view, wrong. Thats not wrong in a moral sense, but wrong in a continuation of the species sense.

I can fully understand why some consider it a mental illness, arguably an inherited or developed one.

My argument would be, so what? If it makes someone happy and does not inflict harm on them or others then whats the problem?

It actually isn't a mental illness from an evolutionary standpoint. A trait not being passed on or not being conducive to passing on does not mean that those traits constitute a mental illness, it means that they weren't conducive to reproducing. Also, concerning that homosexual couples in the modern day do find ways of reproducing, I'd say it doesn't hinder their reproductive capabilities. Their ability to work within their environment to overcome their natural flaws is a trait that ought to be passed on, from an evolutionary standpoint.

Also, Breeders, as I have heard them called, actually are the cause of one of the biggest issues of our time, overpopulation. An increase in homosexual couples who do not wish to reproduce would be the solution to this problem. This means that homosexuality would be our species saving grace. Our balancing act.

Really though, claiming that homosexuality is a mental illness is a much bigger claim. One that needs to be backed up by hard science.

Oooh, Fun fact I heard somewhere, someone check if I'm right: the more male children one has, the more chance the next male child will have Homo erotic tendancies. Thus one could say that there's an evolutionary reason built in when considering overpopulation: those that spawn way more children than to replace them when they die cause children less likely to do the same (except technology.) Thus keeping overpopulation (a major problem with and for many species other than, and including ours) from occuring quite as often.

Then again, I also hear the places where the most children are being born is in under developed nations so... Eh?

Therumancer:
SNIP.

Yes I suggest that you should be banned. Your opinions are not ones that should be tolerated.

This is not a matter of politeness. You have previously suggested that homosexuals are more likely to be paedophiles based upon nothing but your own claimed anecdotal evidence.

This is bigotry. Hiding behind "politeness" is not an excuse. Neo-Nazis and the KKK are not welcome in public debate for a reason regardless of how polite they are.

Grey Day for Elcia:

wintercoat:
-

Seeing as how you missed the message again, I'll quote the man and make it simple:

"You wanna judge what is and isn't normal based off what animals do? Maybe next time I see your wife I'll drop down on all fours and fuck her leg."

It's a bad argument. Don't do it, people.

And seeing as how you missed my message a second time, I'll put it more bluntly. Trying to knock down a strawman with factually wrong arguments is A BAD DEBATING STRATEGY!!!!! It's as bad as using a strawman in the first place. Never said that I agreed with the "animals do it" defense. All I stated was that you were wrong in that humans are the only ones with thumbs.

Also, again, don't make giant pandas sad. I'm pretty sure they're proud of their thumbs. Possums and opossums on the other hand can go fuck themselves.

Anyways, I agree that the animal defense is a bad argument, so I really don't see why we're fighting.

Darknacht:

Therumancer:
Saying that homosexuals are somehow elevated above other sexual deviants is inherantly wrong, they are EXACTLY the same thing, just aroused by a differant abnormal trigger. Once you start saying homosexuals are entitled to representation, the same exact arguement can be made for ANY deviant using the same exact logic. It doesn't seem like an issue now, because nobody is using those arguements, but given time they will come, and with one deviation established as being accepted irregardless of the mainstream, it becomes increasingly difficult to say that others need to be singled out and excluded.

Every time you engage in a sexual act, even by yourself, that does not end in a child you are engaging in a deviant act. Using birth control and masturbation are obviously just as inherently wrong as everything else. In fact to maximize your breeding capability, and ensure you don't preform a deviant act, you should have many women ready to take your seed every time you engage in sexual acts. All sex should have been kept out of the game since its not for the purpose of breeding so its all deviant and you don't want to be deviant.

See, this is one of the reasons why these conversations degenerate. Intentionally ridiculous, and obtuse answers contribute nothing to serious discourse, much like straw man arguements. There is nothing clever about it. It's also responses like this that generally get me to drop out of threads and people to wonder why I don't seem to be taking them, or the opposing viewpoint in general, seriously.

I loved this episode. The pedophilia part made me laugh. I think I'd also respect someone saying that they've got a problem with gay people, rather than the other stupid shit a lot of them say.

wintercoat:

Grey Day for Elcia:

wintercoat:
-

Seeing as how you missed the message again, I'll quote the man and make it simple:

"You wanna judge what is and isn't normal based off what animals do? Maybe next time I see your wife I'll drop down on all fours and fuck her leg."

It's a bad argument. Don't do it, people.

And seeing as how you missed my message a second time, I'll put it more bluntly. Trying to knock down a strawman with factually wrong arguments is A BAD DEBATING STRATEGY!!!!! It's as bad as using a strawman in the first place. Never said that I agreed with the "animals do it" defense. All I stated was that you were wrong in that humans are the only ones with thumbs.

Also, again, don't make giant pandas sad. I'm pretty sure they're proud of their thumbs. Possums and opossums on the other hand can go fuck themselves.

Anyways, I agree that the animal defense is a bad argument, so I really don't see why we're fighting.

Oh. My apologies.

I thought you were arguing against me (debating that the 'animals do/don't defense was a good one) by strawmaning me. But you were actually saying I was wrong in my original post--which is true.

You were arguing the actual comment, not the point I was making. Sorry about that.

No idea why I went with thumbs... Temporary brain loss? :P

ZexionSephiroth:

ACman:

Grey Day for Elcia:
That's a very poor defense. Thumbs exist in only one animal species too.

HAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHA

okokok..... Monkeys. Ya? Monkeys.

Or Raccoons.

Or Possums.

Or Squirrels.

Do lemurs have thumbs too? I think they do. And I think "monkey" only covers a few of the primates, most of which have thumbs of a kind.

Iguanas.

Frogs.

Bird (admittedly somewhat different)

Therumancer:

Also in referance to your earlier message, your far more likely to wind up getting banned for personal attacks than I am for saying things that have come up before over a number of years.

Hell I just reported myself to see what would happen. My forum health can take a few hits.

Yours on the otherhand....

Therumancer:

Darknacht:

Therumancer:
Saying that homosexuals are somehow elevated above other sexual deviants is inherantly wrong, they are EXACTLY the same thing, just aroused by a differant abnormal trigger. Once you start saying homosexuals are entitled to representation, the same exact arguement can be made for ANY deviant using the same exact logic. It doesn't seem like an issue now, because nobody is using those arguements, but given time they will come, and with one deviation established as being accepted irregardless of the mainstream, it becomes increasingly difficult to say that others need to be singled out and excluded.

Every time you engage in a sexual act, even by yourself, that does not end in a child you are engaging in a deviant act. Using birth control and masturbation are obviously just as inherently wrong as everything else. In fact to maximize your breeding capability, and ensure you don't preform a deviant act, you should have many women ready to take your seed every time you engage in sexual acts. All sex should have been kept out of the game since its not for the purpose of breeding so its all deviant and you don't want to be deviant.

See, this is one of the reasons why these conversations degenerate. Intentionally ridiculous, and obtuse answers contribute nothing to serious discourse, much like straw man arguements. There is nothing clever about it. It's also responses like this that generally get me to drop out of threads and people to wonder why I don't seem to be taking them, or the opposing viewpoint in general, seriously.

So, if more people make sarcastic responses to your ignorant close minded statement you will keep your bigotry to your self? That sounds like a good idea. Also my statement that all sexual acts that don't involve breeding are deviant is more logical than your statement that sexual acts that you don't agree with are deviant.

Darknacht:
Using birth control and masturbation are obviously just as inherently wrong as everything else.

Prove it.

Go ahead. Prove that masturbation and birth control are wrong.

I'll wait.

Let me just quickly point something out: If you play your cards right in ME1 you can get it on with a HUMAN FEMALE instead of an alien. ("It gives new meaning to the phrase 'drop down and give me 20' doesn't it?") If you play as a girl when that happens well.... you can put 2 and 2 together

Grey Day for Elcia:

Alrocsmash:
Homosexuality exists in over 450 animal species. Homophobia exists in only one. Which one seems more unnatural now?

People need to grow up.

That's a very poor defense. Age of consent exists in only one animal species too.

EDITED for reasons that become clear later in the forum, lol.

Age of consent does exist in animals, it's called sexual maturity. Animals usually have pheromones or certain visual displays that tell other animals they can have sex. Really the only animals that have sex for fun are humans, dolphins, and pigs, in all other species it's either mating or dominance. I haven't seen the video of animals boinking newborns, but then I don't have Discovery channel so it's hard to keep up.

irishda:

Grey Day for Elcia:

Alrocsmash:
Homosexuality exists in over 450 animal species. Homophobia exists in only one. Which one seems more unnatural now?

People need to grow up.

That's a very poor defense. Age of consent exists in only one animal species too.

EDITED for reasons that become clear later in the forum, lol.

Age of consent does exist in animals, it's called sexual maturity.

That is not age of consent. That is another animal being ready to procreate.

What you describe is an individual going through puberty. Sexual consent is electing to allow sexual intercourse to occur.

Grey Day for Elcia:

Darknacht:
Using birth control and masturbation are obviously just as inherently wrong as everything else.

Prove it.

Go ahead. Prove that masturbation and birth control are wrong.

I'll wait.

Either he's saying he believes sex is only about procreation, and therefore things that prevent that are wrong, or he's offering up a rebuttal to people that believe homosexuality is wrong because it's impossible to procreate in that fashion.

Grey Day for Elcia:

Darknacht:
Using birth control and masturbation are obviously just as inherently wrong as everything else.

Prove it.

Go ahead. Prove that masturbation and birth control are wrong.

I'll wait.

You've been Poe'd.

Darknatch is actually satirizing Therumancer who seems to think that his appalling viewpoint is acceptable because merely because he is polite.

Grey Day for Elcia:

irishda:

Grey Day for Elcia:
That's a very poor defense. Age of consent exists in only one animal species too.

EDITED for reasons that become clear later in the forum, lol.

Age of consent does exist in animals, it's called sexual maturity.

That is not age of consent. That is another animal being ready to procreate.

What you describe is an individual going through puberty. Sexual consent is electing to allow sexual intercourse to occur.

So...all animals are rapists...because females are never electing sexual intercourse to occur?

ACman:

Grey Day for Elcia:

Darknacht:
Using birth control and masturbation are obviously just as inherently wrong as everything else.

Prove it.

Go ahead. Prove that masturbation and birth control are wrong.

I'll wait.

You've been Poe'd.

Darknatch is actually satirizing Therumancer who seems to think that his appalling viewpoint is acceptable because merely because he is polite.

Well, you know, so long as they don't harm someone, there isn't actually anything WRONG with believing something like that. Freedom and all.

irishda:

Grey Day for Elcia:

irishda:

Age of consent does exist in animals, it's called sexual maturity.

That is not age of consent. That is another animal being ready to procreate.

What you describe is an individual going through puberty. Sexual consent is electing to allow sexual intercourse to occur.

So...all animals are rapists...because females are never electing sexual intercourse to occur?

What... I don't... How... My head... hurts...

I really don't understand how you managed to get whatever it is you're getting out of that comment, lol.

My point was that arguing "other animals don't, so we shouldn't either" is inane.

Grey Day for Elcia:

Darknacht:
Using birth control and masturbation are obviously just as inherently wrong as everything else.

Prove it.

Go ahead. Prove that masturbation and birth control are wrong.

I'll wait.

Um... you realize that that was a satirical statement in response to Therumancer's statements that homosexuality is deviant and wrong because it does not 'help propagate the species'. I don't believe that masturbation or birth control are wrong. I think that people already breed way more then they should and so anything that make giving birth to a child a thought out decision rather than something stupid that happens because people are horny is a good thing.
Sorry for the confusion.

Darknacht:

Grey Day for Elcia:

Darknacht:
Using birth control and masturbation are obviously just as inherently wrong as everything else.

Prove it.

Go ahead. Prove that masturbation and birth control are wrong.

I'll wait.

Um... you realize that that was a satirical statement in response to Therumancer's statements that homosexuality is deviant and wrong because it does not 'help propagate the species'. I don't believe that masturbation or birth control are wrong. I think that people already breed way more then they should and so anything that make giving birth to a child a thought out decision rather than something stupid that happens because people are horny is a good thing.
Sorry for the confusion.

Yeah, someone pointed it out. Sorry.

My fault for not going back and fully reading the rest of your conversation before jumping into it.

Grey Day for Elcia:

ACman:

Grey Day for Elcia:
Prove it.

Go ahead. Prove that masturbation and birth control are wrong.

I'll wait.

You've been Poe'd.

Darknatch is actually satirizing Therumancer who seems to think that his appalling viewpoint is acceptable because merely because he is polite.

Well, you know, so long as they don't harm someone, there isn't actually anything WRONG with believing something like that. Freedom and all.

Thats like saying a KKK apologist is okay because they're not directly hurting anybody.

Viewpoints like Therumancer's result in gay-bashing and teenage suicide.

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 . . . 16 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Your account does not have posting rights. If you feel this is in error, please contact an administrator. (ID# 54106)