PlaneShift
Support => Complaint Department => Topic started by: Donari Tyndale on March 25, 2015, 03:03:49 pm
-
Let's start with a picture.
(http://planeshift.teamix.org/onlineyear.png)
Right now, the average amount of players online is actually the lowest since switching to teamix. Clearly, PS is in need of good public relations.
Now, there is a shitstorm just waiting to happen with the whole PS marriage thing. With the current IT/internet community rather set on promoting these issues, it's just a matter of time before the shitstorm ignites, in my opinion. No organization these days can afford to even be superficially accused of an anti-lgbt stance. Now, while I get Talad's argument in the current debate, the question isn't whether this is perfectly permissible as a setting for PS (which it is), but rather the outwards view it portrays. If anyone here followed the recent Gamergate debate, I'm pretty sure that once lgbt-activists hear what's going on, they won't exactly take the same stance as Talad. And then at latest, PS is headed for a PR black hole.
On the other hand, if PS adopted an actively pro LGBT stance, perhaps this would generate positive PR and improve the game's standing? Also, perhaps we should discuss dropping the "There was no homosexual marriage in the mediaval times" argument as "There was no magic, no Klyros, no Kran, no Laanx, no Yliakum etc. in the middle ages" either.
Discuss?
-
I can't but agree with you despite the fame of forum troll you've got... But this time I'm afraid you're on the right. It's not a matter of defending your point of view but of protecting yourself against this kind of future attacks. Imagine someone shares this in tumblr: as soon as one of the radicals sees this, they could be able to seriously harm PlaneShift's already low reputation.
-
Yeah. I can't help but agree that extremist posters don't take kindly to this business.
It's really an easy fix: completely remove the marriage button, and make an Octarchial decree on the matter.
I'm not saying your Decree has to allow it. But it has to make the stance clear.
Why? Because I think part of good RP can mean playing under that oppression. Giving characters a chance to rise up and CHANGE the settings of the oppression!
Or, the decree can allow it, and all of this goes away like water under the bridge.
Like Eon posts below me, it really is honestly just a setting. How can we not play a setting? Good gods guys. Either deal with it or change it IG, right?
It's not as big a deal as you make it out to be. People have played gay marriages in this game as far back as I can remember, and no one raised a stink about it.
-
PS and its settings has nothing to do with LGBT, PS is a game not a politic movement, it's not even made to foster any political opinion of sort including being pro or against LGBT; therefore I don't think we need to flatter any political group or political area.
-
I agree. But someone has made the decision that marriage in PS, at least the button for that, works only for characters of different gender, through a gender check in the source code, hence making a statement. Not making a statement would be not adding a restriction for gender and race.
Also, Cairns idea to remove the marriage function and making an Octarchial decree seems a valid solution.
-
Yep. Like Eon said, we don't need to flatter anyone or make a statement with the game.
All we need to do is make the stance concrete and clear. Put it in game, in writing. Clarify the issue. ["Back up" the marriage button, if you will, because as others have stated there are no books, writings, or else to support it.]
Then, the players can get to work.
-
So you want books about marriage? There are a few planned about marriage tradition for each race (or books about races that speak about such traditions). But you won't ever find an IG book or a statement condemning LGBT marriage or things like that.
Not talking about them in-game is already a message.
-
I'm writing the books on marriage.
I'm pretty sure I remember putting something in there about nolthrir occasionally practicing open relationships or even polygamy, as in accordance with the implications about how they go about things on the race page.
I also point out these relationships have no gender bias if I recall correctly.
Hm. Has that been put in the game? If not...oops. Thought it was. [<.< spoilers?]
-
So marriage between people of the same sex is allowed, yet the OOC marriage button that prevents just that is kept? I am confused. If it isn't prohibited IC wise, then the marriage button should reflect that.
According to Mariana, pretty much anything goes marriage wise, so clearly, the marriage button is not tied to anything IC, most certainly not settings. Hence it is a superfluous item that if kept, solely makes an OOC statement.
Either you should, as Cairn said, back that button up with in game settings, or remove it alltogether. Otherwise, it seems just anti-LGBT. And back to the topic. You can clearly see how this is headed to disastrous PR for PS?
-
So marriage between people of the same sex is allowed, yet the OOC marriage button that prevents just that is kept? I am confused. If it isn't prohibited IC wise, then the marriage button should reflect that.
Either you should, as Cairn said, back that up with in game settings, or remove it alltogether. Otherwise, it seems just anti-LGBT. And back to the topic. You can clearly see how this is headed to disastrous PR for PS?
Disastrous?! No less than disastrous? Sorry but this really looks ridiculous that such things as LGBT pride is disastrous for PS. We have bigger problems like missing engine features, difficulties compiling under certain platforms.
The settings is like that because Yliakum is a dangerous place, the society need to have children because they need them to grow up and work, become soldiers and protect the land. Yliakum is not an opulent society no longer worried about its survival and therefore can spend a lot of time caring about problem smaller than: food, security and things like that.
Sure, two people of the same sex can "merry" but to the ordinary citizen would see it as an oddity, still no one would persecute them because concepts like "racism" and things like that are not accepted ICly by the law.
-
I get your point, Eonwind. But what has the marriage button to do with any of it? Why is it even there? And why is the OOC button linked to different sexes?
Also, you haven't followed the recent events, then. Social justice issues seem to prevail far more urgently than any game content.
-
As someone who has used the marriage button, it makes little to no IC difference. No benefits are granted and you can't even see the location of your spouse as you can with GuildMates. The ONLY things it does are to give the female the same last name as the male [ :( ] and make a totally OOC entry in your IC description. I say OOC because you certainly can't tell if someone is married by looking at them and even less likely could you tell the name of their spouse.
Let's just get rid of the button and make marriage fully IC. Then we solve two problems at once.
-
I get your point, Eonwind. But what has the marriage button to do with any of it? Why is it even there? And why is the OOC button linked to different sexes?
The point is the button is not OOC. The fact is the button feature reflect the society "standard" view about marriage. There are not even specific laws about marriage because it's somewhat the standard condition an individual is usually expected to comply from his/her family (except kran who don't even need a partner to create offspring).
Also, you haven't followed the recent events, then. Social justice issues seem to prevail far more urgently than any game content.
I don't get what you're talking about, are you talking of RL or in game events run by the GMs?
-
I don't get what you're talking about, are you talking of RL or in game events run by the GMs?
The whole gamergate/social justice issues in gaming thing that has been going on since about a year, from which it is safe to learn that anything that can be construed as anti LGBT means disaster for a game in development.
-
There already are a ton of same-sex weddings and relationships in the game you know...this line of code prevents it from being recognized by the game, though, which is why this debate is so heated. It's like a significant amount of relationships in PS aren't even recognized by the code.
-
I am now quite certain that the problem here is not the limit in the game mechanics, but the potential to provoke a flame war. Arguing is more important than the topic. It's like introducing yourself like "Hi, my name is ..., and my sexual orientation is ...", and then waiting for any kind of reaction which might be interpretable, to have a reason to blame and sue. I would not want to spend much time with people who have a need to provoke me until I do something they can criticize. They repel me a lot more than technically unsupported minorities. Technical limits and flaws are much easier to ignore or circumvent than morons.
-
Pretty much, LigH. Hence we should get rid of the marriage button.
-
A friend told me this post wasn't nice, so have a nice wisteria
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/38/Wisteria_fl.jpg)
-
The marriage button can be extremely offensive to female players, and a source of sexual harassment, which is felt OOC. This has not happened as much since there are way fewer players, but I have been offended and angered when, just in one day, at three different times, my character was asked to marry other characters, when there was not even an IG conversation. I was freaked out and offended by this behavior and it seemed completely unnecessary and could feel extremely awkward and unsafe to a new female player. It is just silly and unnecessary.
Before Volki's thread was locked, immediately after Talad posted, I felt no one was able to respond to the comments about "settings." Medieval, is more of a flavor in the realm, not an end all be all, it would be more challenging but the rules would be very clear, this world so loosely resembles the period by any historians standards would be shotty at best to compare it. In this world women have equal rights (we have not even passed the ERA in the USA yet) , and my favorite aspect...scantily clothed upon entry (Nolthrir, Dermorians) There was a zealous religious movement, feudalism, and anyone straying from the flock, tortured and burned for not obeying.
Although guidelines and rules and lore are in place IG, it is the community telling the stories that sets the pace, the community has been and always will be gay supportive, because it is a safe place to explore such themes, and face it the youth are going to do that in PS,sometimes it is easier then IRL. And PS is always going to reflect RL, no matter how hard you think outside of the box, we bring our own experiences to the game, or we explore experiences we cannot IRL, and we cannot truly stop our sub conscious minds from knowing certain truths, even when we think we are playing so outside the box. I find in my experiences of creating a positive vibe in the communities I have a leadership responsibility, is give the people what they want or at least give them the opportunity to explore the concepts they ask for. Awarding the community for their commitment and requests will only result in positive results. Otherwise you will have to get the guards out there and start burning gay folks at the stake and for Laanx's sake give those girls some clothes. Medieval garb would include many layers of restrictive garments.
I would also like to shine a light on Kran, they are not male or female, so they can marry either sex? Have a choice of sexual preference? Marry each other? A built in trans reality to the game and an opportunity at same sex relations, and any sex preference. If we all quite playing our normal characters, and only played kran, the issue would be resolved as it is already built into game mechanics (this I am not sure of because I have never played a kran, nor asked one to marry any of my chars) Anyhow, we should look to Kran to show us the way. And also look to the fact that we can marry cross species in game, which would result in death for a Dermorian elf, birthing a Ynnwn half breed...and I am pretty sure cross breeding for most species has an element of absolute birthing disasters. Are there laws in place to prevent that? We can actually marry cross breed so I imagine not. Encouraging breeding is not the best strong point argument in why same sex marriage is not an acceptable option.
Just my thoughts. I will always vote to remove the button. Marriage is a IRL concept wrought full with all sorts of patriarchal attitudes, even if it is not meant to be IG, ownership is implied by the forced name change on the female chars behalf.
my thoughts :)
-
Siteya has a point. Should we discriminate female characters ICly because that was common practice in the middle ages? Also, the fact that female characters always take the male characters' last name is kind of sexist.
-
I am now quite certain that the problem here is not the limit in the game mechanics, but the potential to provoke a flame war. Arguing is more important than the topic. It's like introducing yourself like "Hi, my name is ..., and my sexual orientation is ...", and then waiting for any kind of reaction which might be interpretable, to have a reason to blame and sue. I would not want to spend much time with people who have a need to provoke me until I do something they can criticize. They repel me a lot more than technically unsupported minorities. Technical limits and flaws are much easier to ignore or circumvent than morons.
Wait, what? Ligh, man, there are a few of us here who are legitimately and peacefully trying to help :/ It's not fair to throw the whole argument under the bus. I totally understand you, but idk. You're a good guy. We can't dismiss things because we don't like them.
Maybe there are people out there looking to nitpick. I just haven't seen it in the posts. That being said, it's generally a good idea to step back and give everyone the positive benefit of the doubt in interpreting posts.
Oh and I promise I'm not trying to bash or disprove you sir! Just asking those of us involved to lend an ear :)
-
Cairn, I don't mind discussing serious matters in a sensible way. If everyone would agree, we might even solve the lack of player base this way.
-
Cairn, I don't mind discussing serious matters in a sensible way. If everyone would agree, we might even solve the lack of player base this way.
Cool :)
I think most everyone is being sensible here.
And like always, we need to take this back to the settings. Siteya's correct in "Medieval" is too loose. [I mean, Medieval Germany? Medieval Europe? Medieval Asia? Medieval Middle East? There are SO many variations of this, and in some of these variations homo marriage was the thing, yo. I mean, Early Medieval times? Middle Ages? I'm lost on that, bros.]
As I have posted before and will post again:
Make it concrete. Those who are writing the settings, put it in there. The fact that an OOC function disallows it is NOT concrete, devs. Sorry >.> Well I guess maybe it is to you guys, but clue us players in too with something we can understand :)
The fact that there are books being written on it is good. That these books seem to allow it is eye-opening.
Why don't we focus on that? Remove the function, edit the function, or just clarify it and leave the function there, but at least there's complete and utter clarification.
Because the way I see it now is:
Settings is divided on the issue.
-
I've been watching this thread (threads?) all morning now. I don't normally post here, especially on threads that can get rather heated. Honestly though, I do care about this subject, and the impact it has on Planeshift.
As a community, Planeshift has always come off as being very LGBTQ+ inclusive, both IC and OOC. ICly I've seen plenty of gay and lesbian weddings, and a number of successful queer relationships. I might even say that I've seen more gay relationships than straight ones. Settings wise, Planeshift flirts with non-binary gender identities and presentations. The kran have a well established third gender. Planeshift even has trans god. If we're already dealing with non-standard notions of gender, and race, I think we can play more than just hetero sexualities as well.
The argument that homosexuality did not exist in the middle ages is a moot point. Ylikum is not our world or our culture, and even if it were same-sex unions are not a new thing, and have been performed historically across the world. The argument that non-child producing unions are frowned upon societally because of dangers present in the world is also flawed. The relative size of Ylikum combined with the ability to return from common death prevent the need for fear of under population. In fact, I'd even argue that a low birth rate is better for fear of overpopulation. Cultural marriage practices from the non-native races of Ylikum might play a bigger role in societal acceptance of gay marriage, and non-binary identities. Even so, Mariana has stated that at least certain populations are accepting of non-traditional, and polygynous unions. I would very much like to see these books if they have been published.
The ideal way to handle the situation in my mind is to have relationships be defined at a cultural level based on location, and in-game race. Ylikum is a melting pot, and is full of fantastic cultures all jammed together into one tiny underground world. Brushing away the complicated social-political nature of all relationships is missing the opportunity for engaging, and deep RP. I would like to see a setting where instead of pretending LGBTQ+ people don’t exist, we provide a platform for exploration, and safe, interesting stories of social rebellion in an open minded community. The last thing we should do is silence queer voices.
Mechanically, I think most of the community is agreed that the marriage button does absolutely nothing, and should probably be removed.
-
PG-13 sex is holding hands or possibly a peck on the cheek. Just saying.
-
PG-13 sex is holding hands or possibly a peck on the cheek. Just saying.
This isn't about sex, don't make it about it. Even children understand love and marriage.
-
If it isn't about sex then how can it be based on sexual preference? Is there another way of understanding LGBT issues? Lesbian, Gay and Bisexuals are subsets of the two established genders based on to whom they are attracted. Those poor unfortunates who feel that they were born in the body of the wrong gender might have a claim to a different issue.
And no, children are given a very superficial understanding of both love and marriage or else there would be a lot less fallout when marriages fall apart.
Than, again I am convinced love is nothing more than a chemical imbalance in the brain.
-
Love isn't sex. You marry whom you love, and that can be anyone. Saying you can only marry a reproductively compatible gender is making it about sex, though.
-
Zayla & Mariana- the books are in Jayose's library
-
Marriage is less often about love than about something else. It is a western notion to marry for love.
-
Regarding the accidental equivocation on "sex" and "gender" a few posts ago, I present to you our friend, the Genderbread Person.
(https://curiousrantsofawannabephilosopher.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/327995_2777345947386_1070226633_2725143_2079251120_o.jpg)
-
Regarding the accidental equivocation on "sex" and "gender" a few posts ago, I present to you our friend, the Genderbread Person.
There was no such equivocation, reading it again should make it clear I used as a synonym for "making love" ;D
-
BTW....
In India there is a spectrum of recognized and socio-normative genders- female/female, female, female/male, female neutral, neutral, male/neutral, male male/femal and male/male...
In the Philippines, sexual identity is not gender based but is defined by one's spirit , so your sexual identity is found within your soul...
and
Islamic Homosexualities: Culture, History, and Literature
edited by Will Roscoe, Stephen O. Murray has an insightful abstract: see
http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=6Zw-AAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA3&dq=medieval+homosexuality&ots=mMiqENXYpl&sig=TKlFSif8Wwt5S33jRmBc0kXjr_I#v=onepage&q=medieval%20homosexuality&f=false
and
Crossing Borders: Love Between Women in Medieval French and Arabic Literatures
By Sahar Amer see: http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=zhHbLI5lUvoC&oi=fnd&pg=PP2&dq=medieval+homosexuality&ots=qd7dWjiMdK&sig=RsJwS_j6ELldzuBV34KO37RMPcs#v=onepage&q=medieval%20homosexuality&f=false
Just to add a little actual historical research to the opinions.
AND
I think this recalcitrance is a huge PR disaster that may already be too public to walk back. It is not a matter of 'political flattery' it is a matter of human rights.
Historically in most cultures and eras, people have died defending such rights.
Thanks Rig for the chart.
RR
-
I don't see any of you protesters submitting a patch, just demanding what you think are your rights. Which one of you had your patch refused?
I have to say that I think that the main reason that the functionality has not been removed is because it has been used in promotional materials. I recall attending a wedding that was 'filmed' for a South American media spot. Sometimes it is hard to remove things from a game because they are advertised features that meant a lot to someone.
Rights, like other abstract human notions, are not real. Anything that can be taken from you on a whim is not yours to begin with. You just have custody of it for a little while.
-
I agree with Cairn, the two issues are separate - marriage button and gay marriage. I feel very strongly about each of them, but in opposite directions (please keep the marriage button, I like the tradition of being married and taking my spouse's name, even though irl I would keep my own name, IG it's awesome and immersive).
I don't see it as "demanding rights," it's a conversation that some of us feel strongly about and are expressing our strong opinions about being able to marry in the same way whether same or opposite sex. That's all. Bilbous, if it's possible to just let people speak without trying to shut it down, that would be a kind thing to do. And it might be that if you were able to shut us all up, it would only be you and LigH IG, and you guys couldn't marry anyway to liven things up :love: :love: :love: Do consider that.
But it sounds like the answer is no, the team will not allow homosexual marriages, only hetero. If true, it's sad to me. I swear the things that make this game great - specifically that it is the only open source MMORPG around, and the people who play - fit perfectly with legal marriage between all genders.
Is it being considered? I appreciate Talad commenting on the last thread. Perhaps it is fair to say that the topic isn't a fringe topic or one being brought up by the same few people over and over, and thus should be put to rest. It's pretty important to many of us playing now.
I know the game is being built by the PS team who are putting in the hard work of coding and updating and expanding, and I love this and am grateful to you guys.
In some small part it is also helped along by players who contribute in their own ways, books, bugs, partaking in GM events with good cheer, etc. It's good when we listen to each other.
This is important. Let's at least listen. I will say that if there is any choice in this matter, if it is not possible to open up the "marriage between any two" button without a lot of work, then I would agree with turning off the marriage button. But I've always loved it, never been harassed (and am sorry for those who have been).
I definitely appreciate the reminder that one of our gods is transgender. Do you see how awesome Yliakum already is???
All inclusive marriage button would be totally in line with this :love: :love: :love: Laanx is on our side :)
-
This, and nothing but this:
But someone has made the decision that marriage in PS, at least the button for that, works only for characters of different gender, through a gender check in the source code, hence making a statement. Not making a statement would be not adding a restriction for gender and race.
This would fix it all. Removing the gender check.
-
Rights, like other abstract human notions, are not real. Anything that can be taken from you on a whim is not yours to begin with. You just have custody of it for a little while.
Right, bilbous. That's exactly how rights work. It's not like they're some internationally recognized pillars of humanity or anything. They're just some abstract notions which can and should be undermined by personal politics.
-
[OOC...Please stay in character]
-
Gosh I'm sorry , feeding this thread in my mind is just feeding the trolls ( no disrespect to the others), but hey were in troubled times, any moment the bronze doors could be kicked in and everyone will have to stand and fight. seems to me at these troubled times it'd be encouraged to have children, for the futures safety, I've nothing against the whole "gay" thing, but i'd makes more sense to me settings wise, as this is the way the dome would go.
-
Gosh I'm sorry , feeding this thread in my mind is just feeding the trolls ( no disrespect to the others), but hey were in troubled times, any moment the bronze doors could be kicked in and everyone will have to stand and fight. seems to me at these troubled times it'd be encouraged to have children, for the futures safety, I've nothing against the whole "gay" thing, but i'd makes more sense to me settings wise, as this is the way the dome would go.
So do you think that gay people would just suddenly become straight because of the present danger? Let me ask you the reverse - could you as a straight person just suddenly become gay because it was needed or something or because others thought it would be a good idea?
People don't just "become" gay because they are bored and have nothing better to do. Its a major part of who and what they are just as being straight is very much a part of who and you are. Its not something that you can just change, so the whole argument about people being straight out of necessity is terribly flawed.
As for fighting goes, a gay person can fight just as well as a straight person. If anything it would make more sense to have those who are gay to take the lead in battle so that those who are straight could protect their wives and offspring.
As for the need to produce offspring, it's really the women that matter here. The more women you have and the more children they can produce in their lifetime, the greater potential there is for FUTURE population growth. While 1:1 partnerships might be more common or the easiest to maintain, a single male could fertilize multiple women, though the more the better.
Now while its easy to say, "gather up the women, we need to breed some troops", those women in question may not wish to reproduce if they think their children will not have a good life and if they were born gay, they are not going to do it unless forced. (just as you would not have sex with another man unless forced) Likewise, having children does little for the present. It means more mouthes to feed hence less food for everyone else, more bodies to protect, and more work for the already busy to do. You are more likely to get a reproduction boom AFTER the war/threat/danger is dealt with then during it ( when the straight men are away from home and fighting in the field)
As for this bit about times in Yliakum being really hard and all, people in Yliakum live rather well. They have lots of food and resources, money, magic, libraries, and fairly modern looking shelters, alchemy, herbalism, and so on. They have guards, governments, religions, education, science and art. These are not the things you find in a society that is so desperate for resources that they have to ignore everything that's not a necessity.
As for the trolls, who exactly are these trolls or was that a strawman that you were beating up on?
-
No, I think Bodier means that only heterosexual marriage would be legally sanctioned in such times.
I also think that the reference to trolls is for a very few who tend to occasionally slip into trolling the hell out of other people's threads and perhaps even start trolly threads of their own? A very few (and certainly RR is not one of them). That was my take on the statement.
I agree that we are extremely comfortable to be in such troubled times or to be in such danger. But probably Talad will kill us all to prove the point :)
However, most of us aren't trolls, and I think all of us care about the topic, actually care (ok Donari I can't get a bead on, but the rest, definitely) a lot.
-
My dear Pierre,
There's a bad habit of calling those with whom you don't agree, simply dislike, or just hate their guys, trolls. Now I don't know what triggers that name-calling, but I'm certain I don't like it, especially when one of the higher-ups has gone so far as to call me a troll in private (that is, through chat and private messages). You say the sin but not the sinner, though, and he knows who he is.
Despite this, and risking to be called a troll again just because I raised a politically incorrect issue from the dead again, I chose to speak up and stand my ground. If being hard-headed and coherent with the way I think means being a troll, then where's my bridge? I was raised in a Catholic household, and all my life I learned that gays were sinners, sick, and that they shouldn't exist. Yet look at me now: a staunch, fervent defender of the same sex marriage. What triggered this change?
It's simple. I'm not a bigot anymore. Back when I was a little kid, I didn't know better. But men learn from their mistakes, and so did I. It's not that
If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.
but that
And above all things have fervent charity among yourselves: for charity shall cover the multitude of sins.
by which I became open to my neighbor, to respect and love them regardless of what they like, as long as it doesn't hurt anyone.
I don't have many best friends: with one of them I almost have a love relationship (what you'd call a bromance), and the other is a confessed homosexual. We've gone to gay discotheques together, and I find no shame in admitting it, despite my parents' hysteria. I've invited him to my house, gone to his, gone out for lunch with the three, and a long et cetera.
This is why I'm writing this today: because, as Roled says, I feel unwelcome in this game anymore. I have contributed, I considered donating (lack of a stable income prevented me from it), I tried my best to roleplay and shape the virtual world in which our imagination thrives. And yet, for voicing my opinion, I get hate, name-calling, and exclusion. But then again, I understand I haven't paid for this game, I don't think I will ever have the chance to, and it will remain in someone else's possession for a long time, and that it's someone else that doesn't share my point of view. And I will keep on playing, until life gives me enough lemons to make me consider myself retired from this scene.
Sincerely yours,
Mishka
-
Gods have mercy, Mishka, don't direct that at me. I do not think you are trolling on this subject. I don't think anyone is.
Back on topic then.
EDIT: Maybe I was not clear - I was translating Bodier's comments because they seemed misinterpreted by Rigs. That does not mean I made those comments and it doesn't mean I agree with them, because I don't.
-
Gosh I'm sorry , feeding this thread in my mind is just feeding the trolls ( no disrespect to the others), but hey were in troubled times, any moment the bronze doors could be kicked in and everyone will have to stand and fight. seems to me at these troubled times it'd be encouraged to have children, for the futures safety, I've nothing against the whole "gay" thing, but i'd makes more sense to me settings wise, as this is the way the dome would go.
Didn't already Mariana say it was not against the settings?
I don't see any of you protesters submitting a patch, just demanding what you think are your rights. Which one of you had your patch refused?
Simple. Remove these lines (273-301)
// Don't let same gender marriages - genderless is an exception)
if((client->GetCharacterData()->GetRaceInfo()->gender != PSCHARACTER_GENDER_NONE)
&& (client->GetCharacterData()->GetRaceInfo()->gender ==
proposedClient->GetCharacterData()->GetRaceInfo()->gender))
{
psserver->SendSystemResult(client->GetClientNum(),
"You cannot marry a person of your same gender.");
return;
}
// If proposer is genderless - He can only marry other genderless
if((client->GetCharacterData()->GetRaceInfo()->gender == PSCHARACTER_GENDER_NONE))
{
// Don't progress if proposed char is not Kran also
if(proposedClient->GetCharacterData()->GetRaceInfo()->gender != PSCHARACTER_GENDER_NONE)
{
psserver->SendSystemError(client->GetClientNum(), "You can only marry other genderless.");
return;
}
}
// Proposer is not a Kran, then he cannot marry a Kran
else
{
if(proposedClient->GetCharacterData()->GetRaceInfo()->gender == PSCHARACTER_GENDER_NONE)
{
psserver->SendSystemError(client->GetClientNum(), "Only genderless can marry other genderless.");
return;
}
}
from marriagemanager.cpp
-
Gods have mercy, Mishka, don't direct that at me. I do not think you are trolling on this subject. I don't think anyone is.
I directed it at you to explain why some consider us trolls. Just that, no hard feelings towards you whatsoever.
-
Actually, historically males are quite capable of having sex with their fellow soldiers, it is rather convenient and no one had to worry about getting pregnant while on the job...
http://www.soldiers-of-misfortune.com/history/gay-warriors.htm
http://www.bilerico.com/2011/04/americas_gay_confederate_and_union_soldiers.php
Even Lucy Lawless outed Xena and Gabriele
-
The only logic I see being applied in these threads is: I Am Gay -- You Must Obey!
You are not being oppressed because one stupid button doesn't suit you. I suspect most of the people complaining feel free to ignore inconvenient game mechanics at will. Many of you that use the game mechanics to level do so OOCly as it is often the fastest way to level.
Pick your battles, this one isn't worth the trouble.
-
Gosh I'm sorry , feeding this thread in my mind is just feeding the trolls ( no disrespect to the others), but hey were in troubled times, any moment the bronze doors could be kicked in and everyone will have to stand and fight. seems to me at these troubled times it'd be encouraged to have children, for the futures safety, I've nothing against the whole "gay" thing, but i'd makes more sense to me settings wise, as this is the way the dome would go.
Settings wise this is shaky premise. As Riggy mentioned, no one just becomes straight because the world needs lots of babies. Even if that were the case though, the threat from the bronze doors isn't as immanent and looming as you make it sound. According to in game books at the library, the Bronze Doors are kept slightly open most of the time to allow for travel, trade, and exploration of the Stone Labyrinths. The Sunshine, and Shadow squadrons are enough to keep the creatures and raiders of the labyrinths away most of the time. If they can't handle an invasion, the doors are closed. In the interior of the dome though, especially in the cities, things are much safer. Yes there are creatures, and bandits and so on, but to my knowledge there has been no major conflict since the end of the ylian-enki war hundreds of years ago. Even the architecture of the cities, and the fact that the people of Ylikum have been able to build monuments as massive as the Iron Temple, or the winches suggest that there is no shortage of a population tp be used as laborers.
Suggesting that only child producing couples are valued societally leads us down a very dark path. Does this mean that relationships between anyone who cannot have children for whatever reason are looked down upon? Not only are some people born without the ability to produce offspring in real life, it also has in-game racist connotations between interracial couples who would not normally be able to reproduce naturally with other races, such as the Klyros. Are these unions also looked down upon? Not to mention that there are still trans and intersex people out there who might also have trouble having children. Are we also to say that their experiences don't matter?
OOCly, PS is first and foremost a fantasy world. The writers and setting devs have the ability create a world entirely unlike our own. This creative freedom allows for the exploration of social structures, and cultural norms that are different than what we have in real life. So why do we keep falling into the pitfall of eurocentric Christian marriage ideals? This issue isn't just to do with settings, or the story in game, it has to do with the stories we tell as a society. Whether or not Planeshift wants to, it's going to have to take a political stance. Deciding not to act is an act within itself. Trying to justify compulsory heterosexuality in a fantasy world makes a very strong statement. We can either create a world that incorporates LGBTQ-alphabet soup voices, or excludes them. I know what world I'd want to play in.
Thanks for reading, and I hope this discussion continues in a positive direction!
-
Continuing with this civil discussion: AND the PR disaster that has resulted from the decisions made by the powers. Bilbous and others, I think you got me wrong- I don't wish anyone to be gay or not to be gay, or to be in any part of the spectrum. What I want, and am willing to struggle with and discuss and stand up for, is the freedom to be who one is, including love. Gayness may have to do with sex, of course, humans in general (but not all) tend to appreciate a variety of sensual experiences. For me gayness is about love.
This is why I care- this is why I continue to discuss, to insist, to resist, to organize. I want to be able to love openly and freely. LOVE.
And it is for me worth standing up for- in the USA so many people said of civil rights- it's the way it is, its not worth the trouble, the powers will not yield to equality. And yet..... In Germany so many people said of freedom of religion, its not worth the trouble, I am not Jewish, you can't change the government, we have no power, and yet.... In India, so many people said, I am poor, I am indigenous, we cannot change the Raj, a march to the sea will not change anything, and yet... South Africa... Stonewall... Selma... "The hardest part is to keep on believing that the turning point is right at hand" singer songwriter Charlie Murphy... Farm Aid and Willie Nelson... Irish hunger strikers died for freedom... and to Bodier's thoughtful comment (I am not being facious Bodier, I thank you) I must remind us all: Sparta.
We must continue to become students of history, imho...
For those who believe in freedom, in love, and in equality, these are the things worth fighting for, standing up for, in all areas of society as the thoughtful Zalya has said.
Zalya I love this!
Gosh I'm sorry , feeding this thread in my mind is just feeding the trolls ( no disrespect to the others), but hey were in troubled times, any moment the bronze doors could be kicked in and everyone will have to stand and fight. seems to me at these troubled times it'd be encouraged to have children, for the futures safety, I've nothing against the whole "gay" thing, but i'd makes more sense to me settings wise, as this is the way the dome would go.
Settings wise this is shaky premise. As Riggy mentioned, no one just becomes straight because the world needs lots of babies. Even if that were the case though, the threat from the bronze doors isn't as immanent and looming as you make it sound. According to in game books at the library, the Bronze Doors are kept slightly open most of the time to allow for travel, trade, and exploration of the Stone Labyrinths. The Sunshine, and Shadow squadrons are enough to keep the creatures and raiders of the labyrinths away most of the time. If they can't handle an invasion, the doors are closed. In the interior of the dome though, especially in the cities, things are much safer. Yes there are creatures, and bandits and so on, but to my knowledge there has been no major conflict since the end of the ylian-enki war hundreds of years ago. Even the architecture of the cities, and the fact that the people of Ylikum have been able to build monuments as massive as the Iron Temple, or the winches suggest that there is no shortage of a population tp be used as laborers.
Suggesting that only child producing couples are valued societally leads us down a very dark path. Does this mean that relationships between anyone who cannot have children for whatever reason are looked down upon? Not only are some people born without the ability to produce offspring in real life, it also has in-game racist connotations between interracial couples who would not normally be able to reproduce naturally with other races, such as the Klyros. Are these unions also looked down upon? Not to mention that there are still trans and intersex people out there who might also have trouble having children. Are we also to say that their experiences don't matter?
OOCly, PS is first and foremost a fantasy world. The writers and setting devs have the ability create a world entirely unlike our own. This creative freedom allows for the exploration of social structures, and cultural norms that are different than what we have in real life. So why do we keep falling into the pitfall of eurocentric Christian marriage ideals? This issue isn't just to do with settings, or the story in game, it has to do with the stories we tell as a society. Whether or not Planeshift wants to, it's going to have to take a political stance. Deciding not to act is an act within itself. Trying to justify compulsory heterosexuality in a fantasy world makes a very strong statement. We can either create a world that incorporates LGBTQ-alphabet soup voices, or excludes them. I know what world I'd want to play in.
Thanks for reading, and I hope this discussion continues in a positive direction!
Thank you all for standing as allies with peoples who are oppressed. It may be a fantasy world this Dome but this struggle is not a fantasy. It is real.
And there are as many consequences of standing aside as there are of standing up.
My good wishes
RR
-
I don't have anything eloquent to say, nor do I have any arguments that haven't already been brought up. I just want to voice my support for a better measure to make our LGBTQ community feel acknowledged in-game - and for getting rid of the marriage mechanic altogether. It's easy enough to simply RP a change in surname.
-
If you cannot tolerate minor inconveniences your freedom comes at the cost of others. This stupid button is a minor inconvenience. I feel bad that your lives are so wretched and empty that you must have this insignificant victory at all costs.
For the record I do not care who you choose to embrace. I personally choose to embrace nobody.
Goodbye
-
The only logic I see being applied in these threads is: I Am Gay -- You Must Obey!
I guarantee you a large percentage of us posters are not gay. I am not gay, for example. Please take this discussion seriously, bilbous.
If you cannot tolerate minor inconveniences your freedom comes at the cost of others.
In what way is asking for a button to be changed at the cost of anyone's freedom but those asking?
This stupid button is a minor inconvenience.
If it is so minor, why not change it?
I feel bad that your lives are so wretched and empty that you must have this insignificant victory at all costs.
This is not insignificant to the people who now feel unwelcome in this game.
-
Dear Bilbous,
I'm sorry to see you go, first of all. I just want to make sure that what's going on is clear to you, because it seems clear to me.
First off, I am not gay. Ergo when you say it's the agenda of "I'm Gay, Obey Me", well, it's really not cool man.
Secondly, to others, I've never been banned. Or if I have, I've successfully circumvented it? :D
Thirdly, to the whole "Your lives are so wretched and empty...blah blah blah..."
Mudslinging, man :/.
Let me clarify this for everyone, for every poster involved:
The second you start bringing whether someone's banned, someone's oriented a certain way in real life, etc., etc., to an argument, it's politics, now. That means that any chance we had of real work getting done is getting slimmer.
Why don't we just treat this as it is? A coalition of players requesting a function to either be added or removed for the sake of continuity.
Why is it so hard? Why does this issue bring out such ugliness? Especially from you, Bilbous? I've known you for some time. You're a very smart, very educated man. It's not a matter of how you feel about the issue in real life. Hell, it's not honestly a matter of the issue itself.
It's not a matter of tolerating inconvenience, either.
It's just requesting to get the stupid button updated or the settings solidified. Simple, right? Let's set aside everything else....
I'd love to help, in any way I can. If I need to go back to settings, to coding, or whatever. Let me be a part of it!
Just guys, gals.....stop this lowblow stuff :/ I don't want to see whether people are known troublemakers, banned often, wretched, or anything else.
Thanks though, for your opinion buddy. I do promise you that I didn't dismiss it, nor have I dismissed the opinions of others. Just...stop with trying to drag other circumstances in.
And on that note, it appears a goodbye is in order.
Goodbye, friend :(
-
I think we all got it wrong, trying to ask for a button to be removed... I think the question is that we want a place in where we can be free, because possibly we can't be IRL - remember, there are places in which homosexual relationships are forbidden. If some people feel unwelcome in this game for that reason, which is so easy to fix, why don't we? Again, I'm not saying we remove the button, but we could certainly improve it.
What happened to the families' GSoC project? Did it just get run over and buried deep below? Deliberately forgotten? Burnt and the ashes scattered all over the Earth? We were promised a new family system, with offspring, elders, siblings, and hell! Same sex marriages! Bring that back, it ain't hard.
-
The marriage button and inclusiveness are inherently linked. The marriage button is a result of patriarchal systems in real life that works its way into the game. A binary gender system that would put boys in this group and treated this way, girls in this group and treated that way, boys and girls have sex and breed. The marriage system is patriarchal because it is an ancient system of ownership of women and still is in many countries, anyone following Afghanistan and the protest earlier this week? This is why there were big debates on why a majority of Lesbians fell silent or protested equal marriage rights for gays in the US, because the dichotomy of marriage is inherently patriarchal, and lesbians & feminists say down with an oppressive system.
Last night I finally discovered that Kran, cannot marry, which in my opinion could also be a point of debate, but also backs up and reflects the binary breeding agenda of the patriarchy, since the rock people don't fit and can't breed they do not get the right to marry, (albeit the only right in PS is to share a male players last name) This would definitely support that the only reason we have marriage in PS is to breed (except that cross species breeding is counterproductive and deadly). But this also dispels the argument that we don't have the code or the patch to remove the button, the krans have the code and so the solution already exists.
Our characters do not know the marriage button exists...that makes it an OOC game mechanic.The marriage button implies 2 harmful OOC negatives, homophobia & sexism, that has been repeatedly observed and spoken against by the player base for many years. This heated debate refuses to go away, but continues to be a thorn in the side, that gets more and more infected and inflamed with each thread closed, festering and oozing foulness and negativity. A simple solution, would be remove the button...then when the debate comes back around on gay marriage, it won't be about the damn button anymore because you gave the players the freedom to choose how they would like to play it out without implying that they should be marrying for breeding at all costs. If you truly feel that the stance of the team is "only hetero marriages are allowed in the realm, then be sure to make that obvious in the laws and be ready for the uprising that will ensue. This is a topic that has been on the fence, and every time you get a new player base, they will ask the same question about that marriage button...and the cycle continues.
I am not going to offer the solutions, because there have been some great proposals out there, I just want to say, no matter how you try, this argument that gets swept under the rug, crawls back out the other side and bites you in the arse, every time.
-
[OOC...Please stay in character]
Wocib is the one who get it right. You all are completly OOYL - Out Of Yliakum Lore.
The question is IC - In Character, what is the wedding made for IC in Yliakum? What does it represent for Yliakumers? A basic principle, common to all races out of religion, politics or whatever consideration : mariadge is a tie, an OFFICIAL bound, between two people that wish a SOCIAL RECOGNITION of their relation.
And most certainly, IC, yliakumers are neutral concerning the same sex or not couple situation.
IC people never had any problem to celebrate weddings in Yliakum, be it hetero or homosexual. Yliakumers don't give a dam. Why are you all shoving actual real life debate in it?
It's a settings thing. Nothing more, nothing less. Keep your activism in your pocket or then were not done with every single debate that shake the world now and then.
We are not in medieval time, we are not in the world, we are in Yliakum. Get back IC, think IC to propose a FEATURE instead of making it a personnal business, darn it.
:)
-
Get back IC, think IC to propose a FEATURE instead of making it a personnal business, darn it.
This is exactly what the players are trying to do, and the developers are refusing.
>mariadge is a tie, an OFFICIAL bound, between two people that wish a SOCIAL RECOGNITION of their relation.
>C people never had any problem to celebrate weddings in Yliakum, be it hetero or homosexual.
Do you not see how contradicting that is? Players roleplay that their characters marry, yet they are not guaranteed whether or not they are actually married by mechanics. If it's the government that refuses to recognize the marriage, then this should be clearly stated IC. It is not. To us it appears that the developers are trying to ignore this issue completely.
-
not a perfect allusion, but, well
another lesson from history for the "keep it in your pocket and be IC" folks... (such a metaphor - if you think about it,,, it makes me laugh )
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magna_Carta
Even IC "lore" which doesn't actually exist, can be changed. Someone invented electricity- and then lots of others thought of ways to use it for the betterment (perhaps) of the populus...
-
Curiously enough, Talad went back on March 25th and edited his original post.
:innocent:
-
Curiously enough, Talad went back on March 25th and edited his original post.
:innocent:
Garris- which post? I don't see it... and I would like to see it... Link? if you would please- thanks
RR
-
Here you go:
http://www.hydlaaplaza.com/smf/index.php?topic=42094.msg475657#msg475657