| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
 Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 19:22:53
|
quote:
Originally posted by redking
A peasant that can't read is unlikely to be tolerant. Most likely most parents in the realms will seek a cure...
A commoner in the Realms (sorry, peasant just doesn't work) isn't automatically ignorant for want of the ability to read.
Commoners have access to bards, to merchants and the news they carry of the wider Realms, as well as oral traditions (where appropriate), local traditions and customs, and knowledge of the deities.
The Realms is not a static place. Travel and trade are the norm.
Ed's post you quoted above already indicates there is no general dislike of homosexuality in the Realms, despite the fact that bigotry is found in the Realms.
It does not follow that most commoners who can't read will seek a cure for offspring that are homosexual.
EDIT: I think it possible that some commoners might look for a cure, depending on their individual circumstances. Magic that can swap genders already exists so it's not too great a leap to imagine that magic that can alter sexual preference also exists. |
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
Edited by - Jeremy Grenemyer on 07 Jul 2014 19:48:27 |
 |
|
|
Garen Thal
Master of Realmslore
USA
1105 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 19:33:25
|
As the resident Cormyr expert, I'll chime in on the various questions directly related to that kingdom, if in fact we're going to explore them as a sample of how such matters are handled in the Realms:
quote:
So the Obarskyrs won't use magical means to remedy the homosexuality of an heir?
Nope. They have never done so. And there have absolutely been homosexual and bisexual Obarskyrs, both male and female. At least two have sat the Dragon Throne as king. There has been at least one who had no interest in sex with anyone at all. No, I can't tell you whom, but I hope to get that chance in the future.
They have encouraged (or in some cases, forced) them to marry and at least try and produce an heir--because a legitimate heir, in the end, is all that matters. With whom an Obarskyr sleeps (married or not) may be on everyone's mind, but no one really stops them, now, do they?
-As regards marriages to cement alliance between kingdoms or noble houses or what have you: political marriages are almost useless unless they can create or solidify claims of inheritance. Once one of the partners dies or the union is otherwise dissolved, it ceases to have any legal weight. A marriage between the children of two noble lines means that their children have the potential, however remote, to inherit both families' property and titles. A childless marriage does not bear that promise.
That's not to say such a marriage would not be a force to be reckoned with while they were both alive and held real power. Of course they would. But their marriage would not hold the same sort of diplomatic power as between two people who could produce offspring. Note: This intentionally ignores the possibility/probability of magic being used to temporarily or permanently alter the biological sex of one of the partners in order to create offspring. By and large, while the Realms is perfectly willing to accept magic in the prevention of pregnancy, or in general sexual activity, its use in conception is less reliable, and far less well-received by most clergy and almost all nobility. |
|
|
|
Kyrel
Learned Scribe
151 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 19:44:36
|
I will let this rest with the following statement for my own part:
Though I have absolutely f*** all against gay, transgendered, whatever minority groups, these 82 words basically make me go "Blargh, not here as well". This statement to me reeks of political correctness, and political correctness of this kind makes me want to throw up. It won't have a deciding influence on me buying or not buying the game or not. But it does make me give off an inward moan. As hashimashadoo says, there will always be asshats who play this game, no matter how the game is written, and frankly, I can add and allow any kind of sexual/gender type minority I see fit in my game, without this kind of sentence existing in the rulebook, and I'd rather have had another 82 words worth of lore in the book.
Peace. |
|
|
|
Hoondatha
Great Reader
USA
2449 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 19:58:03
|
Garen: While I am absolutely not surprised to hear you say that about Cormyr, it's still interesting to hear. Can you say anything about why you can't get specific? (I'm not sure how tight the NDA is, and figure I'll probe for all I can get :) ).
Kyrel: How is merely acknowledging someone's existence political correctness? |
Doggedly converting 3e back to what D&D should be...
Sigh... And now 4e as well. |
|
|
|
BEAST
Master of Realmslore
USA
1714 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 20:12:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by redking
quote:
Shiallia wants all creatures to reproduce and multiply, which means fertile females should engage in sex with partners of their choice, regardless of their marital state[...].
Does this mean that a lesbian couple is only okay if they keep a male stud on the side, and in turn a gay couple is only okay if they keep a surrogate mother on the side? Are they in violation of her precepts if they (or straight couples, for that matter) have sex purely for pleasure, and not for reproduction? Would Realmsian birth control be sacrilege to her?
Sorry if it seems like I'm branching off into a new subject. |
"'You don't know my history,' he said dryly."
--Drizzt Do'Urden (The Pirate King, Part 1: Chapter 2)
<"Comprehensive Chronology of R.A. Salvatore Forgotten Realms Works"> |
|
|
|
redking
Learned Scribe
131 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 20:26:34
|
I imagine the havoc that the bestow curse spell is going to cause in some groups.
Player "I cast bestow curse"
DM "What is the curse?"
Player "I curse him with... homosexuality!"
DM "Now see here, homosexuality isn't a curse..."
Player "Whatever dude. Make him loud and proud or whatever else makes you feel better. The curse says he is gay so I want him gay"
Coming to a table top near you. |
|
|
|
Demzer
Senior Scribe
873 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 20:37:10
|
quote:
Originally posted by redking
A peasant that can't read is unlikely to be tolerant. Most likely most parents in the realms will seek a remedy for homosexuality should their children be homosexual.
What? Why would they if there isn't any religious or moral authority telling them (for centuries) that homosexuals have something wrong? Greeks and Romans enjoyed each other freely and weren't running around searching for cures.
quote:
Originally posted by redking
Does anyone remember 'deaf culture'? This was actually a thing, and there was even deaf acceptance like there is gay acceptance today. However a cure was found for most forms of deafness and deaf culture is no more (the end of deaf culture was even called a 'holocaust' by some people). It is quite possible that gay culture in the real would will be eliminated just like deaf culture was, as long as the cause of homosexuality is discovered.
Deaf can't hear, it's kind of obvious that they have a physical deficiency. What deficiency do homosexuals have that make you so sure they have to be cured?
quote:
Originally posted by redking
In the fantasy setting of the realms homosexuality has a remedy, and that makes it highly likely that there is no 'gay culture' in the realms.
What? Where have you read that? Where is it stated that in the Realms there is a remedy for homosexuality? And on your conclusion, have you thought that perhaps there isn't a "gay culture" because they're not cast out of the culture they're born in?
quote:
Originally posted by redking
If anyone wants to talk about FANTASY SEXUALITY in the realms, I would love to do that. I hope we can do that.
You'll need the mods green lighting that and maybe move the discussion to another scroll. |
|
|
|
Garen Thal
Master of Realmslore
USA
1105 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 20:46:31
|
quote:
Originally posted by Hoondatha
Garen: While I am absolutely not surprised to hear you say that about Cormyr, it's still interesting to hear. Can you say anything about why you can't get specific? (I'm not sure how tight the NDA is, and figure I'll probe for all I can get :) ).
Because it's information that is in--and in many cases, created for, the Royal Lineage of Cormyr, the contents of which are perpetually NDA until WotC decides to make it public or allow me to do so. |
|
|
|
Hoondatha
Great Reader
USA
2449 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 20:51:16
|
Also, remember that for decades Lhaeo hid from people looking for the lost prince of Tethyr by pretending to be Elminster's gay lover. He's explicitly called the Old Mage's beard in Lands of Intrigue, and a "lisping man-lover" in Spellfire.
I think we can agree that Elminster could cast pretty much any spell on Toril, and yet no one seemed to think it odd that not only was he gay, and hadn't changed his preferences, but that he also lived with his lover, and hadn't changed his lover's preferences either. And I don't see any of the Dalesfolk shunning Elminster for his choices, or any fewer adventurers trying to batter down his door for his advice or help because he was "known" to be a gay man.
Also, why do you keep bringing up illithids? Illithids don't have sexuality. They are sexless, born when tadpoles spawned by the elder brain are implanted into slave hosts. It's arguable whether they even have genders; they certainly don't engage in sex. |
Doggedly converting 3e back to what D&D should be...
Sigh... And now 4e as well. |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 21:18:26
|
quote:
Originally posted by Hoondatha
Also, remember that for decades Lhaeo hid from people looking for the lost prince of Tethyr by pretending to be Elminster's gay lover. He's explicitly called the Old Mage's beard in Lands of Intrigue, and a "lisping man-lover" in Spellfire.
I think we can agree that Elminster could cast pretty much any spell on Toril, and yet no one seemed to think it odd that not only was he gay, and hadn't changed his preferences, but that he also lived with his lover, and hadn't changed his lover's preferences either. And I don't see any of the Dalesfolk shunning Elminster for his choices, or any fewer adventurers trying to batter down his door for his advice or help because he was "known" to be a gay man.
Also, why do you keep bringing up illithids? Illithids don't have sexuality. They are sexless, born when tadpoles spawned by the elder brain are implanted into slave hosts. It's arguable whether they even have genders; they certainly don't engage in sex.
Ah, but they have tentacles... And as a wide variety of anime will show you, that means there are possibilities.  
(Never got that whole thing, myself, but it's provided more than a bit of fodder for jokes!) |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Artemel
Learned Scribe
USA
110 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 22:55:32
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Ah, but they have tentacles... And as a wide variety of anime will show you, that means there are possibilities.
(Never got that whole thing, myself, but it's provided more than a bit of fodder for jokes!)
Short, short story on that: Blame Americans. We beat them in the war, changed their culture. Said that drawing actual male members was wrong... the *ahem* phallic tentacles were a replacement. Like about 20 other things that we now see as weird in Japanese culture originate in a very similar fashion. Like the obsession with panties.
-shrug- |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 23:27:41
|
It's my understanding that the tentacle thing long predates American contact with Japan.
Edit: Yeah, it goes back to at least 1814. Commodore Perry forced Japan to open up in 1854. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
Edited by - Wooly Rupert on 07 Jul 2014 23:48:13 |
|
|
|
Thieran
Learned Scribe
Germany
293 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 23:47:05
|
quote:
Originally posted by Hoondatha
Kyrel: How is merely acknowledging someone's existence political correctness?
Well, it isn't, but referring to "political correctness" is a thought-terminating cliché...
Edit: I have read the 82 words in question in their context now, and the more I think about their inclusion in the basic rules, the prouder I am of my hobby :) IMHO, it is no small thing. The developers have my deep respect for it. |
Edited by - Thieran on 07 Jul 2014 23:50:48 |
|
|
|
BEAST
Master of Realmslore
USA
1714 Posts |
Posted - 08 Jul 2014 : 00:55:31
|
quote:
Originally posted by Hoondatha
Also, why do you keep bringing up illithids? Illithids don't have sexuality. They are sexless, born when tadpoles spawned by the elder brain are implanted into slave hosts. It's arguable whether they even have genders; they certainly don't engage in sex.
Well, they have been known to mind-rape people. Does that count for something? |
"'You don't know my history,' he said dryly."
--Drizzt Do'Urden (The Pirate King, Part 1: Chapter 2)
<"Comprehensive Chronology of R.A. Salvatore Forgotten Realms Works"> |
|
|
|
Artemel
Learned Scribe
USA
110 Posts |
Posted - 08 Jul 2014 : 01:36:20
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
It's my understanding that the tentacle thing long predates American contact with Japan.
Edit: Yeah, it goes back to at least 1814. Commodore Perry forced Japan to open up in 1854.
Sorry, wrong war in my head, still had the right nation. The panty thing was WWII though.  |
|
|
|
Hoondatha
Great Reader
USA
2449 Posts |
Posted - 08 Jul 2014 : 01:51:20
|
Beast: Not according to Waterdeep's penal codes at least…
Regarding Shiallia, my personal guess would be that the church would have created special spells to allow for conception without sex in specific instances, such as a fervent worshipper being gay (ie: woman holds hand with man while spell is cast, woman becomes pregnant as though they had had sex).
Contraception would be a bit of an iffier proposition, but would likely be allowable under certain circumstances. For instance, constant child-bearing wears out and can easily kill a woman. This was one of the arguments in favor of birth control in the late 1800's and early 1900's. I don't think Shiallia would have a problem with worshippers using contraception to space out pregnancies and then after a certain number of children to prevent more. And there are obviously plenty of other situations where getting pregnant at just that moment would be dangerous for both mother and (potential) child.
After all, she "rejoices in life and shields and against death." (Powers and Pantheons) Too much child-bearing kills, and she knows it. As long as a worshipper wasn't trying to avoid all pregnancies all the time, I doubt she'd have a problem. |
Doggedly converting 3e back to what D&D should be...
Sigh... And now 4e as well. |
|
|
|
xaviera
Learned Scribe
Canada
149 Posts |
Posted - 08 Jul 2014 : 04:14:47
|
Just a few scattershot responses to the three pages that have appeared here since I last looked at this thread a few days ago:
quote:
Originally posted by The Arcanamach
Someone above just said that certain friends of theirs were going to buy the game because of that 82 word statement. I just found out that my step daughter's boyfriend and another member of his group aren't going to buy 5e now. I know some of you are thinking 'good we don't want them anyway' (because that also was said above). But the point is that statement, good as it actually is, wasn't the best way to handle it. So some will be more apt to buy it and some will not...all because of the same statement. Not exacltly what Wizbro was hoping for I think.
I've been playing DnD for over 30 years. I've seen the game go through hell in the 80s, the backlash it lead to in the 90s (with some of TSRs policies) etc etc etc. And you know what? It survived...because it's the people that make the game fun.
I wonder why your step-daughter's boyfriend and his acquaintance won't buy it. Are they so squicked out by the mere mention of alternative sexualities that they're prepared to forego an entire product line lest someone find that horrifying paragraph in their possession and, god forbid, think they might be just a little bit lavender? Or that they might be reminded that not everybody in the world fits neatly into little boxes? Or are they 'okay' with gays so long as they don't have to actually talk to one?
If those who boycott the product because of this paragraph allege 'religious' reasons or supposed biblical justifications, they probably wouldn't buy the product anyway. I, too, remember the 80s, and IMO the game survived because a) the publisher, the distributors, the vendors and, above all, the players didn't knuckle under to fearmongers and b) some who heard the fearmongers also took the time to look into the truth of the matter for themselves and realized that it was all just 'a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing'.
Perhaps those who find the the words distasteful might take a moment to realize that they also reflect a reality of our world, however much they may dislike it or wish to deny it.
quote:
Originally posted by The Arcanamach
Personally, as a NON-HETERO I find it a little isulting that Wizbro decided to let 'me' know I could play my PCs as non-hetero. I didn't need them to tell me that and neither does anyone else.
There are some people out there who, strangely enough, might not have ever thought to play a non-hetero character (as a bisexual person myself, it didn't occur to me for the first 30+ years I played D&D). There are also some, it seems, who never considered the idea that the gods could take on whatever sex they felt like because they didn't see it written down somewhere.
quote:
Originally posted by Garen Thal
They felt the need include it because for years, there has been nothing in the art, almost nothing in their stories or adventures, to suggest that there are anything but heterosexual, cisgendered white people all over the place. People of all stripes very rightly complain that other groups are not truly represented, or if they are, it's frequently as caricatures or stereotypes. I've had people actually say to me that there are no LGBT people in the Realms. Of course, they're wrong, but because it wasn't in a rule book anywhere, they'd decided it was a 'rule.' Can you imagine, even for just one second, what it would be like to be told by someone that the rules say that you don't exist?
That's why the statement is necessary. It might be better-worded, certainly, but it's a start.
And there are some who might be empowered by these words to learn that they are not abnormal and perverted and, more importantly, that they are not unique. It might inspire people to learn more about themselves or, just possibly, to realize that not everybody is like them and to learn a little tolerance.
quote:
Originally posted by Aldrick
I believe WotC knows exactly what they are doing, and they're doing exactly what any good business should be doing... attempting to attract as many customers as possible. I don't know why people have to read anything more into it than that - instead of accusing them of having some secret evil political agenda, accusing them of being politically correct, and any number of other accusations that have been falsely hurled at them.
I'm guessing it's a PR move. They probably are being 'politically correct' and have decided that doing so makes them look good and will reap financial rewards. Dove's recent 'Campaign for Real Beauty' attempts to garner feel-good points from women while, at the same time, its parent company Unilever promotes Axe Body Spray with highly misogynistic advertising. But even the right thing done for the wrong reason can still be the right thing.
quote:
Originally posted by redking
In game it is highly likely that homosexuality and gender dysmorphia would be considered a disorder. The precise reason that it would be considered a disorder is precisely due to the fact that, in game, these kinds of things could be cured or fixed (or choose whatever terminology doesn't offend you).
In a world where homosexuality is much more accepted than ours, it probably wouldn't be seen as a disorder. And where the gods, certain creatures, and even some mages, can change sex, I'm guessing gender dysphoria wouldn't either. If it's just part of the normal range of human variability (and with one in every few hundred people being born intersex, even male/female isn't a sure thing) then, sure, it might attract some attention (like being left-handed or red-headed) but I doubt it would be considered a reason to break out the exorcisms.
And speaking of 'heteronormativity', yes, heterosexual relationships may be seen as the norm, even in the Realms, but this doesn't always mean that alternatives are necessarily seen as 'bad'. Maybe just 'unusual' or 'infrequent' or 'as long as he has an heir for dynastic continuity we won't make a big deal about who's in the King's bedchamber at night' (and I don't believe that Ed's comment as quoted by redking only qualifies my comment rather than invalidating it).
quote:
Originally posted by hashimashadoo
I don't think that Dungeons and Dragons has progressed to the point where we could see a god taking homosexuality as a portfolio. For now, I'd see Sune and Sharess as the gods of *all* love and lust.
As a self-appointed authority on Sharess, I concur. 
quote:
Originally posted by Hoondatha
Red King's posts are - problematical, but he does bring up an interesting point: if you change "fix sexual orientation" to "change sexual orientation," is there magic in the Realms that would do that?
And the answer is likely yes.
If you can have a Girdle of Femininity/Masculinity, I'm sure there are other magics that will do similar things.
|
Writings on Sharess: Thoughts & Prayers by Xaviera ~ High Priestess of Sharess |
|
|
|
redking
Learned Scribe
131 Posts |
Posted - 08 Jul 2014 : 06:28:16
|
I think some people are not grasping what I am saying about the in game ability to change sexual orientation. Because this is so hard, let me swap to a 'real life' example that will likely be a reality in 20 or 30 years.
Imagine a couple going for a pregnancy screening. In this screening parents will know about what kind of illnesses or conditions their child will have in the future, and such things will be corrected, in utero. Cancer, mental illness, disability conditions, and so on. During this screening, the doctor may say, "the screening indicates a homosexual orientation for your child. Would you like to make any adjustments?". Given this, how many homosexual people do you suppose that will be out there?
I brought up deaf culture because unlike how every person that replied to my point, the people of deaf culture do not consider their condition to be an illness, but rather part of their human experience... which is exactly the way many homosexuals feel. There used to be a LOT of deaf people, they had a culture and it was similar in many respects to the gay movement.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deaf_culture
The causes of most deafness was then identified, and deafness was then prevented, such as through rubella vaccinations. This more or less put an end to deaf culture. Some deaf people even described the curing of deafness as a 'holocaust'!
One needs to think about the implications of clerics/magic in a fantasy setting, and the likely effects. I agree that homosexuality is unlikely to be greatly despised in a fantasy world for the simple reason that it is a peccadillo that is easily remedied.
|
|
|
|
sfdragon
Great Reader
2285 Posts |
Posted - 08 Jul 2014 : 08:04:39
|
yawn...... rl issues suck
the irony is that yes if all goes well in the next 20 to 30 years blah blah blah. The end times will be here before that happens...
|
why is being a wizard like being a drow? both are likely to find a dagger in the back from a rival or one looking to further his own goals, fame and power
My FR fan fiction
Magister's GAmbit
http://steelfiredragon.deviantart.com/gallery/33539234 |
|
|
|
Demzer
Senior Scribe
873 Posts |
Posted - 08 Jul 2014 : 09:08:10
|
quote:
Originally posted by redking
I think some people are not grasping what I am saying about the in game ability to change sexual orientation. Because this is so hard, let me swap to a 'real life' example that will likely be a reality in 20 or 30 years.
Imagine a couple going for a pregnancy screening. In this screening parents will know about what kind of illnesses or conditions their child will have in the future, and such things will be corrected, in utero. Cancer, mental illness, disability conditions, and so on. During this screening, the doctor may say, "the screening indicates a homosexual orientation for your child. Would you like to make any adjustments?". Given this, how many homosexual people do you suppose that will be out there?
I brought up deaf culture because unlike how every person that replied to my point, the people of deaf culture do not consider their condition to be an illness, but rather part of their human experience... which is exactly the way many homosexuals feel. There used to be a LOT of deaf people, they had a culture and it was similar in many respects to the gay movement.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deaf_culture
The causes of most deafness was then identified, and deafness was then prevented, such as through rubella vaccinations. This more or less put an end to deaf culture. Some deaf people even described the curing of deafness as a 'holocaust'!
One needs to think about the implications of clerics/magic in a fantasy setting, and the likely effects. I agree that homosexuality is unlikely to be greatly despised in a fantasy world for the simple reason that it is a peccadillo that is easily remedied.
I'm grasping what you say perfectly, i'm just asking why are you so adamant in considering homosexuality a biological illness. This is the fundamental premise of your argument that i'm against and without this premise your arguments don't hold.
If it's not an illness it can't be cured/fixed, it can be changed through magic, but then with magic you can make people suicide, explode in gory bits or turn them into statues, does that count as curing/fixing their humanity?
"Hey guard, i know i just threw a fireball in the marketplace but i just fixed their lives, no worries!"
Your point about deaf culture is still invalid: if i lost a leg in a car crash it's painfully apparent i've a physical deficiency, whether i think of it as "part of my human experience" or not. If i was deaf i wouldn't be able to hear (and speak probably) and it would be apparent i lacked one of the five senses.
What problem do homosexuals have? What illness? What do they lack? What's their physical deficiency? What's "not working right" in them?
You assume there IS something wrong in them, and go on from there, i contest that assumption.
quote:
Originally posted by xaviera
There are also some, it seems, who never considered the idea that the gods could take on whatever sex they felt like because they didn't see it written down somewhere.
Alright slow down just a bit before i take offense. Gods can take whatever form they want but this is not the same as saying that they're seen by their followers or revered by their worshipers as amorphous blobs or androgynous beings.
Mystra can take whatever form she like, but she is seen as the female "Lady of Magic", her priest preach about her as a her not as a "sometimes her, sometimes him, sometimes it".
Tempus is the "Father of Battle", not the "Father/Mother/Signpost of Battle", Red Knight is the "Lady of Strategy" not "Lord of Strategy" neither "Chesspiece of Strategy". |
|
|
|
Thieran
Learned Scribe
Germany
293 Posts |
Posted - 08 Jul 2014 : 09:24:19
|
quote:
Originally posted by redking
I think some people are not grasping what I am saying about the in game ability to change sexual orientation. Because this is so hard, let me swap to a 'real life' example that will likely be a reality in 20 or 30 years.
Imagine a couple going for a pregnancy screening. In this screening parents will know about what kind of illnesses or conditions their child will have in the future, and such things will be corrected, in utero. Cancer, mental illness, disability conditions, and so on. During this screening, the doctor may say, "the screening indicates a homosexual orientation for your child. Would you like to make any adjustments?". Given this, how many homosexual people do you suppose that will be out there?
I brought up deaf culture because unlike how every person that replied to my point, the people of deaf culture do not consider their condition to be an illness, but rather part of their human experience... which is exactly the way many homosexuals feel. There used to be a LOT of deaf people, they had a culture and it was similar in many respects to the gay movement.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deaf_culture
The causes of most deafness was then identified, and deafness was then prevented, such as through rubella vaccinations. This more or less put an end to deaf culture. Some deaf people even described the curing of deafness as a 'holocaust'!
One needs to think about the implications of clerics/magic in a fantasy setting, and the likely effects. I agree that homosexuality is unlikely to be greatly despised in a fantasy world for the simple reason that it is a peccadillo that is easily remedied.
I am offended by this post. It more than implies that homosexuality is an illness, and that is very offensive. Is offending homosexual people tolerated in this forum? |
|
|
|
redking
Learned Scribe
131 Posts |
Posted - 08 Jul 2014 : 10:53:54
|
quote:
Originally posted by Thieran[I am offended by this post. It more than implies that homosexuality is an illness, and that is very offensive. Is offending homosexual people tolerated in this forum?
Did you even read what I wrote? Is English your native language?
You have chosen to take offense without good reason. Nothing I wrote was insulting or disparaging to any person. |
|
|
|
Demzer
Senior Scribe
873 Posts |
Posted - 08 Jul 2014 : 11:39:00
|
quote:
Originally posted by redking
Did you even read what I wrote? Is English your native language?
You have chosen to take offense without good reason. Nothing I wrote was insulting or disparaging to any person.
Everything you have wrote thus far strongly suggests that you view homosexuality like an illness, a disease (like "Cancer, mental illness, disability conditions and so on." to quote you).
I'm hetero and i have issues with your statements so it's natural that other people take offense at what you write. By all means, if you DON'T think homosexuality is a disease state so and the conversation will carry on without people offended but without that premise your arguments fall apart. |
|
|
|
redking
Learned Scribe
131 Posts |
Posted - 08 Jul 2014 : 12:15:04
|
quote:
Originally posted by Demzer
quote:
Originally posted by redking
Did you even read what I wrote? Is English your native language?
You have chosen to take offense without good reason. Nothing I wrote was insulting or disparaging to any person.
Everything you have wrote thus far strongly suggests that you view homosexuality like an illness, a disease (like "Cancer, mental illness, disability conditions and so on." to quote you).
I'm hetero and i have issues with your statements so it's natural that other people take offense at what you write. By all means, if you DON'T think homosexuality is a disease state so and the conversation will carry on without people offended but without that premise your arguments fall apart.
First off, I don't know what causes homosexuality, and neither do you. I am agnostic on the matter of the causes of homosexuality and therefore I won't make a definitive statement.
What I did say is -
quote:
Originally posted by redkingWho is to say that a cleric can't cure a condition like that, assuming the condition has at it's root a biological cause (for example, homosexuality, or body-brain gender mismatch in some transsexuals)?
And -
quote:
Originally posted by redkingIf readers here had read my posts on this thread, I noted that the cause of homosexuality is unknown (anyone that tells you with certainty is lying or ignorant). It may be genetic. Or it may be a pathogen or parasite that causes homosexuality. Either way it can be remedied in a fantasy world with clerics and magic. The only way it cannot be remedied is if homosexuality is a choice, and thus homosexuality in the 'real world' and in the 'fantasy world' is at odds.
I never stated that homosexuality was an illness (I don't know what causes homosexuality, remember), and I clearly say that in game if the homosexuality is biological, then a cleric/magic could change it. The other possibility is that homosexuality is a choice, in which case in game the cleric would be quite useless.
This comes back to the disconnect between 'fantasy' and 'real life'. Society can't seem to deal with hot button issues rationally, there are people out there getting offended and angry, a company like WOTC shouldn't take the issue on unless they are going to do it thoroughly and competently.
At this point I feel that I should stop writing about this issue as there is no way that I can express my opinion without taking offence.
Thank you to all my interlocutors. |
|
|
|
Hoondatha
Great Reader
USA
2449 Posts |
Posted - 08 Jul 2014 : 12:52:08
|
| Red King, if you acknowledge that you cannot make your opinion without giving offense, perhaps it behooves you to consider that maybe your opinion is offensive. |
Doggedly converting 3e back to what D&D should be...
Sigh... And now 4e as well. |
|
|
|
BEAST
Master of Realmslore
USA
1714 Posts |
Posted - 08 Jul 2014 : 14:37:14
|
Whoah, folks. It seems as if some of you are ganging up on redking.
He is not saying whether he believes homosexuality is a disease, or not. His posts are not about his personal beliefs, at all.
What he is doing is throwing out two alternative possibilities, and then following them to their logical outcomes.
If homosexuality has a physical/physiological basis (in world), then it can be changed/altered/modified/etc. A mage/cleric could stop you from being a homosexual, and turn you into anything else--be it a heterosexual, or horsosexual (lover of equines), or whatever! (And those who view it not only as a physical condition, but also as a detrimental one, like a disease; would call this sort of physiological change a "cure".)
But if homosexuality does not have a physical basis, and rather only has a psychological one (free will/choice/preference/etc.), then it cannot meaningfully be changed in world, because free will is off-limits.
This arrangement poses some significant difficulties in world, as it presents opportunities for players to try to "turn" homosexual characters, which many might find offensive. And it poses difficulties in the real world, as well, because it finds itself greatly at odds with those who defend homosexuality as having a major physical cause, rather than only being a matter of choice. Quite a set of conundrums have popped out of this particular can o' worms that WOTC is choosing to open.
Redking's logic seems impeccable to me.
And personally, I don't care what the exact basis of sexuality happens to be, either way. I believe in respecting people by default, until they've demonstrably inflicted meaningful harm upon others. Whether someone's gay by choice or by genetics, neither hurts me or anyone else, the best I can tell. So I say leave 'em be. Or even better, treat them as complete equals. |
"'You don't know my history,' he said dryly."
--Drizzt Do'Urden (The Pirate King, Part 1: Chapter 2)
<"Comprehensive Chronology of R.A. Salvatore Forgotten Realms Works"> |
Edited by - BEAST on 08 Jul 2014 14:41:05 |
|
|
|
hashimashadoo
Master of Realmslore
United Kingdom
1150 Posts |
Posted - 08 Jul 2014 : 14:54:48
|
I get what you're saying redking - I do. The issue here, I think, is your assumption that *in game*, homosexuality would be considered a disorder *because* it can be changed (and again, I don't disagree with you that changing sexuality and losing body dismorphia would be possible in a world where your sex can be changed by putting on a magic belt). That is basis of the problem people are having with your posts.
Also,
quote:
Originally posted by BEAST
And personally, I don't care what the exact basis of sexuality happens to be, either way. I believe in respecting people by default, until they've demonstrably inflicted meaningful harm upon others. Whether someone's gay by choice or by genetics, neither hurts me or anyone else, the best I can tell. So I say leave 'em be. Or even better, treat them as complete equals.
^this
|
When life turns it's back on you...sneak attack for extra damage.
Head admin of the FR wiki:
https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/ |
Edited by - hashimashadoo on 08 Jul 2014 14:57:14 |
|
|
|
The Arcanamach
Master of Realmslore
1842 Posts |
Posted - 08 Jul 2014 : 14:56:18
|
What BEAST just said. I think WotC should have handled this without the blurb. I know they meant well, I really do. But they didn't think it through. I will say some folks are getting a bit up-in-arms a little too much over the issue...which just proves one of my original points about better ways to handle this.
That said, I know for (likely) the majority of games this isn't going to be a 'problem' but for those who like definitive answers in-world (which redking seems to prefer) this raises problems on how to handle things within the context of the game/the Realms.
I don't identify as hetero and yet I take no offense to redking's posts. Like BEAST, I see them for what they were meant to be. Could he have chosen a few words with more precision? Sure. Does his post 'seem' a bit argumentative? Kind of. But that doesn't change what he was actually saying.
Frankly, I think what we have here is a group of folks who take offense to anything that appears to be in opposition to the notion of 'inclusiveness' (one of those words I hate along with so many other catch phrases/words out there). People are allowed to have dissenting opinions. Just because you get offended by it doesn't automatically make you correct...and it doesn't matter what angle of an issue you fall on either. If you are 'loud and proud' and take offense to the point of 'attacking' someone and wanting to 'shut them down' then you're just as guilty as those asshats who literally search for and physically assault gays (which was a real problem back in the 80s).
Having read this entire thread I've seen only one person come in here and actually state they refuse to allow LGBT PCs (and I assume actual players as well). Does that offend me? HELL YES IT DOES. But I'm not going to stoop to that individual's level and 'attack' them in turn and I support his right to that opinion/belief...even if I think such folks aren't worth the oxygen they deplete from the planet (and don't take that literally please, ALL life is sacred IMO). |
I have a dream that one day, all game worlds will exist as one. |
|
|
|
xaviera
Learned Scribe
Canada
149 Posts |
Posted - 08 Jul 2014 : 15:00:43
|
quote:
Originally posted by Demzer
Gods can take whatever form they want but this is not the same as saying that they're seen by their followers or revered by their worshipers as amorphous blobs or androgynous beings.
Quite true. They have 'personas' that are (usually) gendered, but can appear in any form they choose. If the party encountered a woman who gave them some information, there's no reason that it couldn't have been an avatar of Tempus, for example. In the case of the discussion on Corellon that started this off, however, he might very well appear to his worshippers as female a significant percentage of the time.
quote:
Originally posted by redking
Who is to say that a cleric can't cure a condition like that, assuming the condition has at it's root a biological cause (for example, homosexuality, or body-brain gender mismatch in some transsexuals)?
Perhaps the negative reaction to your statement comes from your explicit use of the word 'cure' - substituting 'change' might have generated less animosity. Now, if homosexuality or gender dysphoria or being intersex are simply part of normal human variation, then whether any (canon) spells (short of 'Wish') might truly and permanently change that is another question. At issue here is whether or not homosexuality (e.g.) results from something being 'broken'.
Consider whether the 'normal' combination of two recessive genes to produce Tay-Sachs Disease, cystic fibrosis or sickle-cell anemia is something that can be 'changed' by a clerical spell (as distinct from, say, Down Syndrome, which is caused by abnormal cell division). Frankly, if I had to make a ruling, I'd say that 'the gods' or 'fate' or what-have-you sometimes cause conditions that normal magics cannot alter, and that such things as homosexuality, gender dysphoria, left-handedness and a preference for red-heads or chocolate cake are among these. (I'd do this simply for gameplay reasons - I don't like the idea of conventional magic being able to fix everything with a wave of the hand, as it removes too many potential challenges - but my opinions about the causes of homosexuality also naturally determine which category I think it falls into.)
|
Writings on Sharess: Thoughts & Prayers by Xaviera ~ High Priestess of Sharess |
Edited by - xaviera on 08 Jul 2014 15:09:08 |
|
|
|
Garen Thal
Master of Realmslore
USA
1105 Posts |
Posted - 08 Jul 2014 : 15:08:51
|
redking, I think I understand the point you are trying to make about being rational in discussing these matters, but I hope you can also understand that the language you've used throughout this thread is what is eliciting the reaction you're receiving. The use of terms like "fix" and "remedy" and "corrected" rather than "change," "influence," or "alter," suggests that you believe that there is something wrong that needs correcting. It's to that idea, I believe, that people are taking offense: not that sexuality might be altered by a spell, but that the use of a spell to alter sexuality should be viewed as curing the person.
If the cause of a condition or a state of being is a disease, or a "parasite" or "pathogen," if that state of being is something that can be "cured," then the language you are using--regardless of your intent--is saying that that state of being is an illness. The words you're using have meaning, and they also have connotation, and that connotation is offensive to some people. The extreme inference from your posts, the net result of your language, is the impression that if we could just figure out what causes non-heterosexual desire (be it a genetic, pathological, parasitic, viral, bacterial, or whatever else), then all it would take is figuring out the right spell and then *snap* no one would be gay. Even saying "I don't know what causes homosexuality" suggests that it is a wrong-state, rather than just a state. It implies--intentionally or not--that there is more or less value to being one or the other. You may not be saying it. You may not mean it (and I don't believe that you do). But your language leaves far too much room to infer those opinions from your statements.
I am all for discussing this issue rationally. Dispassionately, even. But rational persons examine their language and admit when it does not match their intended message. They also don't throw their hands up when someone else disagrees. Yet I find that this is the course of most 'rational' discussion:
A: Let's discuss this rationally.
B: All right. Here is why I disagree with you...
A: You aren't being rational!
So yes, by all means: let's have a rational discussion. And if you'd like to honestly and more thoroughly examine the implications of things like gender variance and sexuality, I'd say go for it. But please take a moment to consider how the words you're selecting can be read by someone who doesn't necessarily share your opinion.
[As a matter of correction, I'll point out that the condition referred to as 'gender dysmorphia' is actually called 'gender dysphoria.' They might sound quite similar, but the terms imply wildly different things.] |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
I think WOTC entered the modern age
Topic Locked
