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

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 . . . 16 NEXT
 

"What? you're gay and you sell books, you must SHAG the books! So we fire you for no reason."
- Eddie Izzard

Flimsii:

Lord_Gremlin:
Considering the ending of this Jimquisition i think I will share my personal opinion.

Well now, I do have a problem with gay people. Aka they are sick in the head and whatever excuse medics came up in USA when they realized they can't cure them did not just made them normal... Look, curing schizophrenia is not easy either. If possible at all.

That said excuses debunked in this video are pathetic indeed.
And pedophilia and homosexuality are indeed vastly different things. That said, both are cases of mental disorder but vastly different ones.

But what's most important here is that developers, Bioware, don't owe anything to anyone. If they want to include whatever new content it is entirely up to them. Your only choice is to either buy their game or don't buy it. It's as simple as that. Attacking writers for example is childish and outrageous. You may disagree with them or consider their creation abysmal.. But the only thing you're entitled to is ability to skip their game and don't buy it.

Mental disorder. They are sick in the head. Sir i would kindly request that you gtfo these forums,political/ideological differences are what make this forum great but you describing peoples sexual orientation like its a disease that needs curing for humanity's sake makes me sick. Face it you are just as ignorant and bigoted as the people who compare homosexuals to paedophiles. As jim said if you just said you were homophobic and had personal problems with it thats a position i could understand but to just say nope they are sick and need curing is disgusting.

As much as I hate agreeing with Lord Gremlin, I kinda have to defend his point. Legally speaking, being gay/lesbian/transgender/whatever is a mental disorder. Not that I have a problem with it, my aunt is gay, I don't have a problem with her, it just means mental deviation from the social norm. Trying to find statistics on such a matter calls anywhere from 1% of the population to 25% of the population a member of the LGBT club. Assuming that it's somewhere in between those two numbers, that is still a deviation from the social norm of the the population of the world, thus a mental disorder. Again, not bashing gay people, just pointing out that his comment is completely valid. We just take it at face value of the social stigma associated with the phrasing he used.

ACman:

Grey Day for Elcia:

ACman:

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.

You can't limit the rights of someone to express a non-violent opinion because of what someone else might do.

Kingshadow6:
Legally speaking, being gay/lesbian/transgender/whatever is a mental disorder.

Wrong. Homosexuality isn't considered a mental disorder and hasn't been for quite a while. A simple Google search would show you that.

Also: homosexuality is not related to transgender in any way.

Wait where did Jim get a real life Penetrator?! Man wtf he always gets all the cool props from games! >.<

as for gay in the game. I had no idea it was an option. I just remember vividly that Bioware said they didnt want to give Shepard that option in ME2. figured it was the same for ME3. If its the last game in the Shepard story y not let him/her switch hit for once.

ACman:

Grey Day for Elcia:

ACman:

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.

I agree with Grey Day for Elcia you can believe what ever you want to that is your right. As long as you keep your viewpoint to your self and don't run around telling people that they are immoral deviants you hurt no one. Therumancer's problem is he is a bit too vocal about his bigotries. He should not be banned assuming that he does not go too far(i.e. directly attack anyone or encourage violence) but the community should make it clear that we disagree with his ignorant viewpoint and that we would rather he not express it.

I didn't have time to read through the tons of retards posting comments, or the people uselessly trying to argue about how gay is ok (you aren't going to get THROUGH to these haters). I just wanted to say that I thought your video was incredible and was one of the funniest things I've seen in a long time.

"But if that's how you think... you are a ?#!$ing bad person." - Jim Sterling.

Last week's strange fiction left me confused and unamused, but this week so radically makes up for it that I can only say "Point and match, Jim." Truly a Sterling moment.

Garrett Horvath:
I didn't have time to read through the tons of retards posting comments, or the people uselessly trying to argue about how gay is ok (you aren't going to get THROUGH to these haters). I just wanted to say that I thought your video was incredible and was one of the funniest things I've seen in a long time.

You call others "retards" because they believe differently to you?

That would make you a smaller person than them.

Kingshadow6:
As much as I hate agreeing with Lord Gremlin, I kinda have to defend his point. Legally speaking, being gay/lesbian/transgender/whatever is a mental disorder. Not that I have a problem with it, my aunt is gay, I don't have a problem with her, it just means mental deviation from the social norm. Trying to find statistics on such a matter calls anywhere from 1% of the population to 25% of the population a member of the LGBT club. Assuming that it's somewhere in between those two numbers, that is still a deviation from the social norm of the the population of the world, thus a mental disorder. Again, not bashing gay people, just pointing out that his comment is completely valid. We just take it at face value of the social stigma associated with the phrasing he used.

I'm not sure where you live but where I do LGBT is not a mental disorder legally or otherwise and deviating from social norms does not mean that you have a mental disorder.

Nothing more fun than reading every other page or so of this forum and watch the topic wildly jump around from talks of gayness to evolution of the opposing appendage. We even had a special guest Therumancer, and I do mean special what with his dogged antiquated bullshit arguments followed by his usual leaving in a huff because he refuses to argue with anyone who can prove him wrong, if he is doesn't just leave without a post so he'll never have to admit to himself that he's using an argument that's been disproven for decades.

Published in 1984, Erotic Preference, Gender Identity, and Aggression in Men was with the current data of multiple case studies of pedophiles. The most common threads of pedophiles found then was that they generally had a lower IQ, had family troubles in their past, were typically introverted, and had another diagnosable mental disorder. Made while most people were still calling AIDS GRID and the Reagan administration was busy not giving a shit.

Addedum: for all those lovely idiots out there who would say homosexuality is a mental disorder, in 1905 Freud was one of the first of MANY psychologists wrote about how homosexuality wasn't a mental disorder. Mental disorders disrupt a person's ability to reason and perform everyday activities. Homosexuality does neither of these. As Freud coined it in 1935 : "Homosexuality is assuredly no advantage, but it is nothing to be ashamed of, no vice, no degradation, it cannot be classified as an illness; we consider it to be a variation of the sexual function produced by a certain arrest of sexual development." Of course reason typically doesn't work in the face of idiocy. In 1954 we lost an international hero, Alan Turing without whom we couldn't have won World War 2 and the father of computer science as we know it(also enjoying the bitter irony right now that Therumancer hate postings were made possible by a homosexual inventor), when two years prior police of the UK prosecuted him for his homosexuality leading to chemical 'treatment' until his eventual resignation to cyanide poisoning. In 1973 the Board of the American Psychiatric Association finally lifted homosexuality off its list of mental illnesses.

jessegeek:
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.

Sarcasm doesn't always come across in Internet posts, and if that was intended as reductio ad absurdum, it failed to make a relevant comparison to the point believed to be made absurd. For the reasons I attempted to explain in the segments you found irrelevant.

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.

A view of reality which might be reflected when I said:

But it has to be said that having every significant human male character you interact with be bisexual to give options is just lazy writing. (Or every female, for that matter, though it stretches credibility slightly less.) I'm perfectly willing to believe that the Xyrg'kkk'l are all culturally bisexual, or that elves have much higher rates of bisexuality, or whatever. I'm even willing to believe that one or two human characters (including the player) are bisexual. (emphasis added)

...

...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.

I'm willing to believe that your knowledge of the period and cultures involved was significant. The attitudes of ancient Greece and Rome- or at least, the attitudes reflected in the remnants and relics that remain available to us for study- make a poor excuse for ignoring the attitudes and conventions of the world we live in. A world where integration of both sexes into the military, and of homosexual service-members into the military, is still a major sticking point. Where homosexuality was illegal in the PRC until 1997, and India until 2009.

Naturally, these are reflections of societal attitudes, and attitudes can change more quickly than the actual presence of those to whom those attitudes are applied.

But on the other hand, if one wanted to carry on reducing to the absurd, based on the evidence of Greece and Rome, we could expect the Alliance to find very little worth discussion in the taking of foreigners as slaves.

That so little was changed in removed the homosexually-geared love scenes from the original Mass Effect serves at least as much as evidence that the matter was given very little consideration in the writing as that there was some sort of consistent or considered approach given to the matter.

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.

No phrase that contains the term "appears to be" could ever be taken to be anything but presumptive, including from the point of view of the person saying it. However, that assumption is based on an (admittedly limited, admittedly flawed) range of statistical evidence, as well as the fact that the very existence of male bisexuality is considered sufficiently controversial that some have devoted the time to studies specifically engineered to prove or disprove its existence. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/23/health/23bisexual.html

Culture:

5a : the integrated pattern of human knowledge, belief, and behavior that depends upon the capacity for learning and transmitting knowledge to succeeding generations

b: b : the customary beliefs, social forms, and material traits of a racial, religious, or social group; also : the characteristic features of everyday existence (as diversions or a way of life} shared by people in a place or time [popular culture] [southern culture]

c : the set of shared attitudes, values, goals, and practices that characterizes an institution or organization [a corporate culture focused on the bottom line]

d : the set of values, conventions, or social practices associated with a particular field, activity, or societal characteristic [studying the effect of computers on print culture] <changing the culture of materialism will take time - Peggy O'Mara>

-Merriam-Webster Online

3. a particular form or stage of civilization, as that of a certain nation or period: Greek culture.

-Dictionary.com

That you may be using a different meaning, I cannot help.

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.

I'm still entirely uncertain you grasp the thrust of the argument you're describing. I believe the "person I don't know" in this context is you, and the assumption that among your countrymen, as in mine, bisexuality is relatively uncommon.

Very well; between the Union Jack next to your profile and the information that you work and study at Cambridge University, let me note that The Independent, citing the IHS, claims 1 in 200 in the UK to be bisexual. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/official-statistics-reveal-uk-gay-lesbian-and-bisexual-population-2087829.html

I'm sure there are flaws in that survey and its methodology; I don't doubt, for any number of reasons, bisexuality and homosexuality might be under-reported. However, it is at this point something resembling data pointing in a particular direction, which at present I am placing next to little more than conjecture.

Garrus!

I don't always agree with Jim 100% but this time I do. Completely. If his point was not made abundantly clear to those making the arguments then there is no hope left. Thank god (which is also Jim) for the Jimquisition.

ACman:

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....

Your forum health meter is actually pretty meaningless. I had pretty much a perfect record until around Christmas of last year when I got banned for making some critisisms of The Escapist itself that I shouldn't have but the ban was repealed and I was put on the current status for that where it was made clear that they weren't going to follow it digit by digit for offenses.

As this subject has recurred in one form or another for years now, and this isn't the first time I've taken a position like this one, I'm not paticularly worried about it. Those hits won't last you long though if you keep flaming people, especially if they decide your a trouble maker. I've been around quite a long while.

Feel free to disregard me, but I'm telling you, if you make it personal, it doesn't matter what your reasons are, you aren't going to last. Not everyone here is as laid back as I am.

Therumancer:

Father Time:
You put in that crack at being progressive to piss off progressives who don't like you using the word cunt and all that right?

As for pedos, if they ever consider letting you be a pedo in a non-porn game like Fable or Mass Effect then we can start talking about them. Until then, they're irrelevant and it's a huge leap to go from "let's be inclusive to gays" to "let's be inclusive to [insert type of criminal here]" .

Also bear in mind pedos have already been the protagonists in non-erotic movies (specifically the Woodsman with Kevin Bacon). They weren't glamorized or marketed to. They can be the protagonist and still be handled well.

But, what about demands of being inclusive of other sexual deviations... "deviation" as something other than the norm. Things that aren't nessicarly criminal.

Once you say that homosexuals are ENTITLED to representation,

Who said they were entitled to representation? Nobody gets to demand they be included in games other people make that they aren't funding.

If they are represented though, it's no big deal.

Therumancer:

what about people who are wired for other things that is normal and perfectly natural for them? People who are into the whole "adult baby" thing and can't get aroused otherwise, or scat, or bondage, or numerous other things.

I'd argue that Ivy from Soul Calibur is catering to or at least inspired by the S&M crowd (and that crowd has been featured in Saint's Row 3) but that's beside the point.

Can we stay off the slippery slope? If Bioware loses all of their good business sense and wants to put a scat fetish in the next game, that'll be a different thing. We won't suddenly lose our right to complain about that if we don't make a fuss about gays. Nor is Bioware required to give them any recognition.

Like Jim said, in Mass Effect's case there can be a gay shepard but you can choose to make him straight.

Therumancer:

because Bioware can't very well say "well, the gays are entitled but you aren't".

"We choose not to put certain fetishes into the game, and that is our right to do so."

What's important in these games is relationships not sex, we don't even get to see them have sex so it's kinda irrelevant what they're doing.

I'm sure a lot of people would want to see Kratos or Shepard or whoever in the act and not just know they're doing it, but they won't show it.

Therumancer:

This entire arguement is that because Bioware included gay male options in other games, they should have to include them in every product they release with any type of romantic elements at all.

Speaking for myself, it'd be nice if they did for certain games, but I don't think they should be forced or pressured into doing so. Even if they make another series with a blank slate protagonist.

Oh and as a final note:

When's the last time you ever saw a game protagonist with a fetish (being gay or bisexual does not count as a fetish)?

When's the last time you saw a movie protagonist with a fetish in a movie that was not centered on that fetish?

Games that let the player pick their own persona are really just not for me in the first place. If I wanted to just be me, I wouldn't be playing the video game. If I wanted to be whatever the hell I want, I'd make my own media. I appreciate a game that makes me something different than myself in an effort to create a developed characterization. I'd rather he just be either gay or not.

Besides, even though I understand that videogames and books are different forms of story conveyance, I think the video game community will eventually realize that nobody has ever praised a "choose-your-own-adventure" novel as a masterpiece. They can be great fun but will never be the height of reading experience that people think back on nostalgically. That is how I feel about games letting to choose your character traits.

Darknacht:

Therumancer:

Darknacht:

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.

Incorrect, I'm talking purely about biology in that part of the discussion. A healthy, properly functioning system, as opposed to one that is not. Which is largely besides the overall point of why this is an issue with "Mass Effect" which has to do more with kow towing to political correctness than anything else.

I say what I do largely to provide balance on these forums, which generally lean far to the left. This applies accross a number of topics. Dropping posts like this is pointless if your looking for a serious dialogue on the subject, and if your not, why bother to even say anything at all? You aren't even making a valid point for a hypothetical third party observer who might be neutral on the subject.

I'll also be honest, one of the reasons why I bother to post is due to the extremism on these forums when it comes to certain topics, people who are oblivious to there being any side to these issues other than the one they had been holding onto. In the overall scheme of things the point is to demonstrate that there is another side to this besides the strawman of religious or moral opposition, and that there is indeed a middle ground between that and the left wing position of total and complete acceptance, which goes beyond this issue.

Speaking for a period of years here on The Escapist alone, I've actually received a bit of praise from people who appreciated what I have to say, because many admit they had never heard a lot of the things I had to say before, and had to re-think some of their assumptions even if they in many cases wound up coming to the same conclusion. I received one private mail to that effect in response to what I was saying in regards to Jim's last video on this subject for example not that I'm going into that whole thing again here.

My point is that disagreeing with someone does not give you the right to disrespect them. I obviously disagree with, and could be just as ridiculous in return, or as hateful as other responses I've received. People who act like they can disregard the other side entirely are the actual ignorsnt ones... and also largely responsible for issues like this one keeping society divided more or less down the middle, creating turmoil which benefits noone.

Overall though, a point which many people seem to miss, probably due to my the answers I gave on request, is that my point has very little to do with gay rights. It's all about entitlement, and minorities demanding representation in creative works. The points I'm making could be drawn anywhere.

See, to argue this point with me your basically saying that you have never felt that political correctness has ruined a creative work, and pretty much giving up the right to make such criticisms about things in the future. I don't think many people see it that way, because of the whole "hot button" topic of it being about gays right now, but this situation is fundementally the same as a minority character being written into a show specifically because of political demands, rather than having been intended to fit into the show to begin with.

People keep bringing up the fact that there is some evidence that there might have been male homosexuality intended in ME1 that got cut, and operating under the assumption it was cut due to fear of backlash from bigots. In reality all we know is that Bioware claimed that they didn't think such things fit with their image of Mass Effect, plenty was written about it, and it was even mentioned to Destructoid. Basically the creators themselves said "we do not want to do this" but they wound up relenting due to pressure, and going in the direct opposite direction from their initial statements.... and THAT is the problem, and it would be a problem if they had compromised on any similar issue, not just this one.

Not to mention that it's doubtful given Bioware's track record with things like "Jade Empire" (pre-ME1) and "Dragon Age: Origins" which came a bit later, that they would have cut it due to fear of some kind of backlash, because they had already pushed those buttons before. It was a creative desician and one they were pretty much not allowed to stand by. That is ultimatly the sum total of my arguement here.

Also as a final note, there is this constant assumption that I hate gay men, go out of my way to bash them, and get whipped up into some kind of frezy at the merest mention. That's hardly the case. The subject doesn't come up every 15 minutes (it just seems like it because of all the ME3 topics relating to it, with Jim covering it two weeks in a row now for example), every time something homosexual happens in fandom, because I only care in very specific contexts.

What's more I'm amazed at how many people are bigoted towards me for not agreeing with them, and no other reason. See, ME3 isn't involving any kind of behavior that I find inherantly offensive and my earlier statements are far from saying *all* gay men are pedos or anything of the sort (no I won't go into it again, but I was very careful on how I stated my position despite people putting words into my mouth). What is actually being shown here is not something I have a paticular issue with, other than it being put into the game against the stated wishes of the creators, who apparently experimented with the idea, and decided it didn't fit.

Believe me or not, but that's pretty much where I stand.

... and I went through all of this to try and demonstrate you can actually have a more meaningful dialogue and find out more, by talking, as opposed to being ridiculous or going into "attack mode" every time someone with a diametrically opposed viewpoint shows up. Even if you don't wind up agreeing with them.

Grey Day for Elcia:

flippedthebitch:

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

HAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHA

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

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.

OOOH Clearly that's what you were referring to. Clearly.
I did not miss the point (though I am hard). I got what you said. It was just silly. I LOL'd.

I agree, the "no other living thing on the planet does it therefore its wrong" argument is kinda being a little stupid. Personally I would have went with anything on that list of yours before thumbs. It doesn't really fit ya know what I'm sayin? Undermined your point somewhat.

Darknacht:

Kingshadow6:
As much as I hate agreeing with Lord Gremlin, I kinda have to defend his point. Legally speaking, being gay/lesbian/transgender/whatever is a mental disorder. Not that I have a problem with it, my aunt is gay, I don't have a problem with her, it just means mental deviation from the social norm. Trying to find statistics on such a matter calls anywhere from 1% of the population to 25% of the population a member of the LGBT club. Assuming that it's somewhere in between those two numbers, that is still a deviation from the social norm of the the population of the world, thus a mental disorder. Again, not bashing gay people, just pointing out that his comment is completely valid. We just take it at face value of the social stigma associated with the phrasing he used.

I'm not sure where you live but where I do LGBT is not a mental disorder legally or otherwise and deviating from social norms does not mean that you have a mental disorder.

Totally. What do you mean by "legally a mental disorder"? Where does that come from? A "deviation from the social norm" is not the definition of a mental disorder. A mental disorder is confirmed through scientific testing not casually looking at social behavior and comparing it to the "norm", which is so wonderfully vague it has no real meaning. By your little scale being white is a mental disorder cause most of the people in the world aren't white so its not the "norm". Also, if you wanna get really technical, a behavioral disability and mental disability are not the same thing. So what your (poorly) describing is a behavior disability.

That being said, being gay is not a disorder or a disability. It is your sexual orientation. It is not a disorder to be treated. THAT, is misleading, ignorant and insulting, whether you meant it or not.

Reptiloid:
No Jim, pedophiles don't "fuck kids".

While I do get the point you're trying to make regarding the comparisons to homosexuality, you're making it sound like pedophiles with a basic level of self control doesn't exist.

Pedophilia alone is not an action, nor is it a crime. It's an attraction. And while both you and the media in general seem to want to brand all pedophiles are monstrous rapists, fat greasy trenchcoat-wearing psychos who'd eagerly jump at every opportunity to kidnap children and do unspeakable things to them, that simply doesn't have any grounding in reality.

I'd go as far as to say the majority of pedos have their primal urges well under control, and are well aware that acting on them would be harmful. And out of a genuine love and respect for children, choose not to do so.

Claiming all pedophiles are rapists is just as ridiculous as comparing pedophilia to homosexuality.

you hit the nail on the head my friend and you did it so well that I feel I must expand on it.
pedophiles and homosexuals have one very clear thing in common,SEXUAL ATTRACTION, its not something they can choose or decide, they were born with it and while I hate to point it out, it must be said that if pedophilia (a form of sexual attraction) is considered a mental problem or some sickness, then by the same standard you can say the same about homosexuality (a form of sexual attraction)as if one form of sexual attraction that's a minority is considered a mental problem or some sickness why wouldn't the other be the same, on that note bestiality is also considered a mental problem when its all about sexual attraction, the only logical conclusion to come to is that if you aren't sexually attracted to someone of the opposite sex then you have a mental problem, its simple logic, all forms of sexual attraction that doesn't have a chance of reproducing is clearly as much of a natural violation as the man born with no sense of self preservation. we evolved from animals and all life evolves to survive, sexual attraction exists so we will reproduce and continue our species, thus if your attracted to something that cant reproduce it serves no natural purpose and must be a mistake at best.

Therumancer:

Darknacht:

Therumancer:

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.

Incorrect, I'm talking purely about biology in that part of the discussion.

As far as biology is concerned any sexual act that does not produce a child is the same. So how is oral sex, masturbation, or sex using birth control any different from being gay? If I have sex with an other guy no child will be produced, if I masturbate no child will be produced, if I engage in oral sex no child will be produced, if my wife is on the pill(assuming its working correctly) and we have sex no child will be produced. How are any of these more or less deviant?

Therumancer:
In the end this is about me opposing what amount to demands of entitlement and enforced political correctness, not a result of any other position I might hold.

How do you know that is why it was put in? PR statements don't always reflect the intent of the creators and they could have changed their mind. You are making assumptions and then criticizing others for making different equally, if not more, valid assumptions.
And as far as PC ruining the game you don't have to be gay so it cant ruin your game. Where you not paying attention? If ME3 made you have sex with a guy for every girl you had sex with to balance it out I could understand the problem but you are only gay if you want to be. And according to BioWare this was added in because they wanted to not because they where pressured to, so stop trying to ruin the game by pressuring the creators.

Father Time:
[

Speaking for myself, it'd be nice if they did for certain games, but I don't think they should be forced or pressured into doing so. Even if they make another series with a blank slate protagonist.

Then we more or less agree here, and there isn't much to argue about, since that's the bottom line of what I've been saying.

If you've followed my comments on other threads, I myself have mentioned they need more adult/sexual material in games that are not specifically focused on them. That said however I do not think games should be pressured for not being politically correct and not involving every group that decides it should be included... either sexually, or non-sexually. I am pretty much against political correctness in all of it's forms.

In the other thread Jim started with his last video I was reluctant to answer questions about my position on homosexuality in general due to fear over how it would confuse the overall point of what was being discussed (and I was right, it did). People seem to overlook the simple point that in the end I really could care less if they put gay guys into video games as an option. I simply draw the line at the idea of entitlement and people saying that they SHOULD be included, or that it's somehow wrong for them not to be in games like this one. To me it's all about the creator and the intent. You wouldn't have had me (and I think a lot of other people) going off about this if Bioware had not stated pretty clearly they did not feel male homosexuality fit with the game to begin with. It's sort of like the situation with TOR, Bioware said "there are not going to be any homosexuals in ToR" (of either gender) ever since there have been incessant efforts to pressure Bioware to change that, if they do it's going to be because of the pressure not because they felt that this was something that fit within their creation, and involved characters they created and wound up being that way.

If it happens on it's own, it happens on it's own however, which is why I am a huge fan of "Dragon Age: Origins" and have never attacked it, and you've never seen me go off on things like "Jade Empire" or similar games.

In the end this is about me opposing what amount to demands of entitlement and enforced political correctness, not a result of any other position I might hold.

flippedthebitch:

Grey Day for Elcia:

flippedthebitch:

HAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHA

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

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.

OOOH Clearly that's what you were referring to. Clearly.
I did not miss the point (though I am hard). I got what you said. It was just silly. I LOL'd.

I agree, the "no other living thing on the planet does it therefore its wrong" argument is kinda being a little stupid. Personally I would have went with anything on that list of yours before thumbs. It doesn't really fit ya know what I'm sayin? Undermined your point somewhat.

Yeah, not really sure why I went with thumbs first... Momentary laps in brain? >_>

Darknacht:

Therumancer:

Darknacht:

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.

Incorrect, I'm talking purely about biology in that part of the discussion.

As far as biology is concerned any sexual act that does not produce a child is the same. So how is oral sex, masturbation, or sex using birth control any different from being gay? If I have sex with an other guy no child will be produced, if I masturbate no child will be produced, if I engage in oral sex no child will be produced, if my wife is on the pill(assuming its working correctly) and we have sex no child will be produced. How are any of these more or less deviant?
And as far as PC ruining the game you don't have to be gay so it cant ruin your game. Where you not paying attention? If ME3 made you have sex with a guy for every girl you had sex with to balance it out I could understand the problem but you are only gay if you want to be. And according to BioWare this was added in because they wanted to not because they where pressured to, so stop trying to ruin the game by pressuring the creators.

See, and again this comes down to nonsense. I don't even know why I try at times.

The point is simply that homosexuality is like any other form of arousal, it just happens to be deviant from the intended workings of the human body. This is not to say that there is anything wrong with sex that does not produce children, that's you trying to be ridiculous to make some kind of point. Simply that heterosexuality is the way the body was intended to work, and any other kind of arousal is by definition a deviant behavior. Most of what your saying is out of context to the original point and the reasons for making it.

As far as the creators of the game go, again, this has been an issue going back to nearly the beginning, and the intentions of the series were stated by Bioware. Yes, obviously things did change due to the pressure people have been putting on them constantly, but the initial intent stands, and there is no real point in argueing it.

We apparently have diametrically opposed opinions, and nothing is going to come of it, so I'm just going to drop this here unless there is a constructive purpose to it.

Besides I've already said my piece in this thread in general, and your posts are sort of a reminder that it might be time to just stop responding again and hopefulyl stick with it this time, because I've said my piece, others have said theirs, and it's not going to go anywhere except for circles at this point. My intention was never to "win" an arguement or convert anyone to begin with.

Therumancer:
The point is simply that homosexuality is like any other form of arousal, it just happens to be deviant from the intended workings of the human body. This is not to say that there is anything wrong with sex that does not produce children, that's you trying to be ridiculous to make some kind of point. Simply that heterosexuality is the way the body was intended to work, and any other kind of arousal is by definition a deviant behavior. Most of what your saying is out of context to the original point and the reasons for making it.

As far as the creators of the game go, again, this has been an issue going back to nearly the beginning, and the intentions of the series were stated by Bioware. Yes, obviously things did change due to the pressure people have been putting on them constantly, but the initial intent stands, and there is no real point in argueing it.

We apparently have diametrically opposed opinions, and nothing is going to come of it, so I'm just going to drop this here unless there is a constructive purpose to it.

Besides I've already said my piece in this thread in general, and your posts are sort of a reminder that it might be time to just stop responding again and hopefulyl stick with it this time, because I've said my piece, others have said theirs, and it's not going to go anywhere except for circles at this point. My intention was never to "win" an arguement or convert anyone to begin with.

Please explain how any of the other things I listed are any less of a deviation of the intended workings of the human body than homosexuality. I really would like to know, I'm not closed minded you just seem to have no argument.
And it seems from the beginning they wanted to include every romantic possibility they could but where unsure if the fans would accept it. Is there a statement somewhere that says that they put it in because they felt pressured to or that they where doing it because of political correctness?
I would really like real answers to these questions. I am very against developers feeling forced to change there games because of out side pressure, it detracts from their ability to be creative. If you can show me that this is the case I will agree with you on this point, I am not an unreasonable person I will listen to evidence.

Many things can be viewed from a purely logical standpoint, but that doesn't make it the correct conclusion. I would say that homosexuality is a natural product of genetic drift. With no selection pressure to force reproduction to be most efficient things get loose.I believe its natural purpose is to curb the massive increase in population that we are currently experiencing. If you view it as a population wide phenomenon rather than an individual success/fail scenario then homosexuality makes allot of sense.
While you could apply this logic to paedophilia as it effectively removes both parties from reproduction (as the child will develop emotional scarring probably meaning they will have difficulty in adult life), there is a huge difference between consent and rape. The only way for a paedophile to achieve their desire is through rape, where as homosexuals can consent. That's why logic in this situation is a pile of wank.

Therumancer:

ACman:

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....

Your forum health meter is actually pretty meaningless. I had pretty much a perfect record until around Christmas of last year when I got banned for making some critisisms of The Escapist itself that I shouldn't have but the ban was repealed and I was put on the current status for that where it was made clear that they weren't going to follow it digit by digit for offenses.

As this subject has recurred in one form or another for years now, and this isn't the first time I've taken a position like this one, I'm not paticularly worried about it. Those hits won't last you long though if you keep flaming people, especially if they decide your a trouble maker. I've been around quite a long while.

Feel free to disregard me, but I'm telling you, if you make it personal, it doesn't matter what your reasons are, you aren't going to last. Not everyone here is as laid back as I am.

This is not flaming.

You've decided to come onto a forum and denigrate an entire section of society. When you do that you're throwing yourself open this sort of response. My disgust is justified.

Aw man- as soon as I saw you using an actual user's comment (screen shot it) as an example to pedophilia.. I just had to grind my teeth together seeing that. Ouch.

OT: I'm not into homosexuality but I don't disapprove of it. The fact the game has it only shows how far gaming has gone to be more open minded yet not forcing us to accept the fact it's there. In other words, I am glad I can make Shepard seem gay but really make him straight if I wanted to. Mess around with interest options as the game progresses but I still have a thing for Tali so she gets all my attention.

Haha so awkward at some moments like with you.. and the .. cock sword- BUT it's still alright I watched through it and some of your other examples really were spot on. As much as I don't feel right about harsh facts I had to agree with them. Well said is what I am getting at Jim. But yeah.. good video yet very touchy in one way or another where I feel some people aren't ready to accept the truth yet.

[quote="Therumancer" post="6.353118.14014402"]

The point is simply that homosexuality is like any other form of arousal, it just happens to be deviant from the intended workings of the human body.[quote]

This is the sort of shit that we are talking about. You keep on wanting to talk about deviancy.

DEVIANCY IS LIMITED TO:

Non-human objects
The suffering or humiliation of oneself or one's partner
Children
Non-consenting persons

IT DOES NOT INCLUDE HOMOSEXUALITY.

Complain about flaming all you like but your opinions are disgusting.

Hookah:

Lord_Gremlin:
Considering the ending of this Jimquisition i think I will share my personal opinion.

Well now, I do have a problem with gay people. Aka they are sick in the head and whatever excuse medics came up in USA when they realized they can't cure them did not just made them normal... Look, curing schizophrenia is not easy either. If possible at all.

That said excuses debunked in this video are pathetic indeed.
And pedophilia and homosexuality are indeed vastly different things. That said, both are cases of mental disorder but vastly different ones.

But what's most important here is that developers, Bioware, don't owe anything to anyone. If they want to include whatever new content it is entirely up to them. Your only choice is to either buy their game or don't buy it. It's as simple as that. Attacking writers for example is childish and outrageous. You may disagree with them or consider their creation abysmal.. But the only thing you're entitled to is ability to skip their game and don't buy it.

Man, can I borrow your time machine?

*high fives Hookah*

Nuff said!

Lord Gremlin, I respect your right to express your opinion, I do. I can't respect your actual opinion, however, as it's just smothered in homophobia and, well, nonsense... It's the first time I've ever heard of homosexuality being referred to as a mental disorder, and while certainly a novel way of looking at it...

You're saying that potentially millions of people are all in the exact same phase and severity of that disorder in order to develop relationships with each other?
I think you should do some reading on mental illness before you make that assertion. It's not the full story at all.

But in any case, my Shepard won't be gay because that's not how I envisage my interpretation of him. My friend's Shepard, however is female and I'm not sure he even bothered with the romance options at all. It's as Jim said- it doesn't matter if the option to pursue same-sex relationships is in ME3.

What matters is that they give the player, any player, with any sexual orientation to explore the story how they want, or don't want.
I think that's absolutely wonderful, and a shining example of how games can tell meaningful stories.

For me, Mass Effect was less about exploring the galaxy (which I absolutely revel in!) than it was about exploring human nature by flinging it across the stars and out of its comfort zone.

And that, certainly, is worth any controversy.

Knocked it out of the park, Jim!

EDIT:

Lord Gremlin, I would like to emphasise that while I strongly disagree with your interpretation, your argument is actually mature and well mannered.
Please don't take my above statements as an attack, and I hope that you get the game and enjoy continuing your Shepard's story.

I agree with your video completely. Good show.

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?

No I really think we should play the damn game until we get some more context before

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.

Quite frankly I have no idea what you're talking about, wrex referring to the female krogan as woman? I don't recall that at all and it sounds like the most minor thing in the world. Here's the main and only things I remember about that: He tried to help her out of her case when she said she can help herself, him jumping off the Normandy in anger at what the Salarians are doing. Him caring about the future of his species is well reflected in the demo.

Zachary Amaranth:

From an evolutionary point of view? No, it's not wrong. In fact, homosexuality tends to be more prevalent in times of famine and war (stress alters natal development), and makes a lot of sense from an evolutionary standpoint: It keeps species, theoretically, from overpopulation.

I take your point about "so what?" but the problem here is, "evolutionarily wrong" doesn't translate to mental illness in any sense. Nothing you just said supports why it could be considered a mental illness.

Care to try again?

RedEyesBlackGamer:

Something can't be "wrong" from an evolutionary standpoint. Instead of saying that it has no reason to exist, you should be exploring why it has persisted if the answer isn't immediately obvious.

jboking:

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.

DISCLAIMER: I do not attach any stigma to the term 'mental illness'. I do not use it in a derogatory way nor do I believe it is something an individual should ever be judged on.

The whole 'survival of the species' thing is a fallacy. No species in existence exists to survive 'as a species' they exist to pass on their own genetic material. Homosexuals are inherently not the ideal for doing this. An individuals genes do not care for the species they belong to, they care for being passed on to another generation.

Further to the above paragraph I'm going to do something incredibly irritating and patronizing and guess the counter argument many people will put forward which is 'But we treat each other with kindness and respect people, surely if all we wanted to do was pass on our genes we'd just fuck every member of the opposite sex and kill every one of the same?'.. or an argument to that effect. Well no, we wouldn't, by not acting like savages we ensure mutual survival, I allow you to survive, you allow me to survive, therefore MY genes (the important ones in my view) get passed on.This is seen in nature as well, morality is just a more evolved version of this survival mechanism.

Of course now we have to begin making certain assumptions, and I carry this on in the spirit of debate and to a certain extent playing devils advocate.

Firstly, assuming homosexuality has a genetic predisposition. If there is a 'gay gene' or several of them they do not HAVE to have a point. They may simply have persisted because occasionally for whatever reason homosexuals reproduce, its a recessive gene, or any other number of factors. The existence of homosexuals does not mean they have a 'point'. It must be remembered that evolution hasn't finished, we didn't turn up as modern man and then nature went 'Fuck it, im done here!'

Modern day homosexual couples find ways to reproduce? Well through totally unnatural means, that's hardly relevant.

I understand why the whole overpopulation thing is a compelling argument for the 'point' to homosexuality, but its fundamentally flawed when you consider the basics of evolution and genetics.

I realize I've almost totally lost the point of 'homosexuality is a mental illness' as in honesty its not like I have hard evidence one way or the other, and as I say I continue this more in the spirit of debate than fighting a corner. On that subject however I would argue that MANY mental illnesses depression, schizophrenia and so on are genetic in nature AND do not benefit the individual nor help them reproduce. They in fact hinder the individuals ability to function and therefore, though not physically, mentally hinder the individuals ability to reproduce. It doesn't seem totally incomprehensible that homosexuality could be classed alongside these.

Just thought of something- if some people are saying that the asari do not count having a gender thus it's not gay for a female Shepard to be making love with one- couldn't the same thing be said if a male Shepard made love to an asari seeing her as a 'him' instead?

Because of you think about it, asaris can actually change their gender for certain purposes like breeding (correct me if I am wrong, I don't know much about Mass Effect despite playing through the first game). So a male Shepard can ether count that as homosexuality going on or see an asari as a shemale. Seriously. But maybe I am thinking to deeply into the matter at hand.

What would be far more interesting is to see Tali's face. That'd be awesome- maybe they'll finally show it in ME3 but I doubt it since it could ruin her fandom or make fans feel regret overall.

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 . . . 16 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Your account does not have posting rights. If you feel this is in error, please contact an administrator. (ID# 54301)