Homosexual Representation

[fletch_talon]

All those laws you mention have a reason even if it doesn't make sense to us(in unregenerate state). Yes under the law was a harsh time but you can't take that in some attempt to make a religion something its not, and say it applies to us in the age of grace.

And yet you're saying that the whole homosexuality deal is still relevant even though it can be thrown in the exact same category as all those rules you suggest we ignore.

So shellfish was risky then but not now... thats cool.
Sodomy was very likely an unhygenic practice back then, now, if the proper precautions are taken (as with anything) this isn't a problem.

See the problem? The problem is you're ignoring details, and I'm sorry to say you're probably doing so for the simple reason that you find homosexuals "icky" which is an incredibly ignorant attitude to take.

 

[Voicuboyy]

i do not like homosexuals.. nor their presence... i don't have anything against them, but there are the really gay people which i don't like.. as long as they mind their own business and don't try to be gay with straight people.. they're ok

 

[BARADOK]

I dont think putting "normal" gay people in TV will help people accept them better, because there are no "normal" gay people. There are just gay people. They are just people with a brain defect. There is something wrong in their brains, they cant choose to not be gay, they are just born that way.
I say let them have every right that a "normal" couple has. They havent done anything wrong and shouldnt be punished for being born that way. But things like that require "rational" thought, which is something alot of people in power lack.

 

[aperpheldy]

I dont think putting "normal" gay people in TV will help people accept them better. I think when people realize it is not in anyway "normal", but its not normal in the same way as autistics are not "normal". There is something wrong in their brains. They cant choose to not be gay, they are just born with the mental defect of being attracted to people of the same sex.
I say let them have every right that a "normal" couple has. They havent done anything wrong and shouldnt be punished for being born that way. But things like that require "rational" thought, which is something alot of people in power lack.

Homosexuality is not a form of mental retardation. In the 80's people where INCORRECTLY put in mental insitutions, but this has been completly revoked. Being gay is in no way like having autisim. I beg you, please research both before you make increadbly incorrect statments such as this one.

 

[LockHeart]

A lot of the shows that come over here from England are very open with their sexual relationships. Torchwood & Dr. Who (to a lesser extent) are some of the better ones in my opinion, but I think it's just that Captain Jack is just that smooth guy everyone knows who is always picking up the chicks, but instead this time is always picking up the chicks/guys/alien invaders. It's quite funny but still completely in character. Probably the best example of an Omni-Sexual if I've ever seen one.

Am I the only one who finds Torchwood and all of its characters completely unlikeable?

 

[Inverse Skies]

From what I can gather with being in uni and having a few friends who are gay, the wider community is slowly becoming more tolerant towards homosexuality in general. Of course there is always going to be pockets who are vehemently against it, but in general they seem to be more accepting which is fantastic to see. Both of my gayfriends have boyfriends and really, its no different to any heterosexual relationship at all, they have the same doubts and fears and joys. I'm still at a loss to explain how people can be so against the idea, because personally there is nothing wrong with it.

 

[Iron Mal]

The thing is that when you try to represent ANYONE besides the social majority in media without a good reason to do so (so unless it is actually relevent to what is going on in a film or game) then it will feel forced and will often fall short of the intended message and just fortify the stereotype (unless it's a significant point and distinctive then most people will just settle for face value and stereotypes because that makes things easier for us).

For example, it is hard to think of a reason why a character's sexuality would be of any importance in a game so stating that the protaganist is also gay but 'normal' wouldn't carry much weight (it would just feel like yet another piece of arbitrary plot development, like one of those city history lessons the loading screen of Oblivion gave you), it also would seem out of place as well (does it really matter if my character likes men or women? he can still fire a gun/swing a sword right?).

It must also be said that if you choose to widely advertise yourself and your sexuality and try to get as much attention to it as possible then you can't be overly suprised when someone comes along and undermines that, if you want to avoid having negetive stereotypes in the media, then simply don't make yourself an easy target and stay out of the media spotlight.

 

[Retoru]

Not trying to offend any gays or lesbians.


But homosexuals are not "normal" they are wrong in having relationships with the oppisate sex.
Regular people dont want to hang out with homosexuals because then other people would assume that the straight people are homosexual.
I personaly dont like homosexuals because homoexuality is a sin against my religon.

Please, read something other than your bible from time to time. Or, if you insist upon only reading it, at least stop cherry-picking it. Believe it all or believe none of it. Let me help you a bit. I know the passage you're using for your "sin" argument is Leviticus 20:13 which reads "If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them."

Ok, but let's look deeper at the bible, still staying in Leviticus cuz it has some great stuff. How about Leviticus 20:9 which tells us we should kill unruly children? "For everyone who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to death. He has cursed his father or his mother. His blood shall be upon him."

Then there's Leviticus 20:18 that tells us to ostracize anyone who engages in intercourse during a woman's menstrual period. "If a man lies with a woman during her sickness and uncovers her nakedness, he has discovered her flow, and she has uncovered the flow of her blood. Both of them shall be cut off from her people."

Leviticus 22:44-45 says we can own immigrants as slaves..."Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property."

Leviticus 19:27 says you can't ever get a hair cut or shave your beard..."Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard."

Leviticus 19:19 says we can't wear clothing made of two fibers or plant two crops on one parcel of land..."...do not plant your field with two kinds of seed. Do not wear material woven of two kinds of material."

Leviticus 11:10-12 says we can't eat mussels, arthropods(lobsters and crabs) or shellfish..."But all in the seas or in the rivers that do not have fins and scales, all that move in the water or any living thing which is in the water, they are an abomination to you. They (shellfish) shall be an abomination to you; you shall not eat their flesh, but you shall regard their carcasses as an abomination. Whatever in the water does not have fins or scales; that shall be an abomination to you."

You get the point yet? And, no I didn't make any of these up, grab your bible and take a look. Like I said, either stop selectively believing in the bullshit that book says or believe in ALL the bullshit it says. After all, it is the word of god, is it not? That means that it just HAS to be as relevant now as it was when it was written, am I right?

Really this amuses me, how can you take the old testament (under the law or "under the blood") and relate it to the age of grace, or the church age? As a non christian I guess you would assume laws meant for the jewish people in the old testament (under the law) era as relevent to those under the age of grace. So I can see how you would make the mistake, but really for those times those laws had a purpose. the not eating shellfish was because they aren't always clean or if you don't cook them right you can get sick for example. There is also laws saying free debts every 7 years or not planting every 7th year. These where based on reason, IE if you plant wheat every year forever in the same field you deplete it of nutrients etc. Or to stop you from holding slaves forever.

All those laws you mention have a reason even if it doesn't make sense to us(in unregenerate state). Yes under the law was a harsh time but you can't take that in some attempt to make a religion something its not, and say it applies to us in the age of grace.

The "Age of Grace"? That sounds like a load to me, but I'll go with the flow. But, I have to ask a simple question: Why are the other passages archaic and no longer relevant, but the one about homosexuality is still alright? Could it be because you're using your holy book as a justification for you to be small minded and ignorant? Using your diety's supposed hatred of homosexuality to back up your bigotry, perhaps?

You really should read your holy book, it states many times that this god fellow loves all people equally with an unending perfect love. So, he can't very well hate homosexuals since they fall under the heading of "all people".

Also, keep in mind that most mental health professionals agree on the root causes of homophobia, namely that you have repressed feelings of latent homosexuality yourself and you lash out against homosexuals as your own way of dealing with your own desires to engage in homosexual behavior. Instead of being a homophobe just go fellate a dude, you'll feel better in the end...the rear end...nooch!

 

[cathou]

actually, looking at the reply in this thread i realise how much the general perception of gays have change in the last 15 years. In games, well, keep in mind that most of the time you dont really know the sexual orientation of the caracter, because it have very few influence in the game. Since we can state than an homosexual is a normal person who is attracted to his/her own gender, unless you have specific reference to romantic/sexual relationship, you dont know if the caracter is gay or not.

but...

in Sims 2 you can date you own gender, in fable II too
In fallout 3 you can have sex with the prostitute in Megaton, even if you are a girl.
In KotOR 2, one fo the Jedi is lesbian
etc...

 

[Flying Dagger]

is there seriously people who give a s**t about this?
if it really bugs you, there's always character creation.

 

[Flying Dagger]

Am I the only one who finds Torchwood and all of its characters completely unlikeable?

probably. here in england it's a crime to speak against doctor who or any spin off show they produce.
punishable by being publicly proved wrong :hawhawhaw:

 

[D_987]

Fable 2?

 

[sneakypenguin]

Really this amuses me, how can you take the old testament (under the law or "under the blood") and relate it to the age of grace, or the church age? As a non christian I guess you would assume laws meant for the jewish people in the old testament (under the law) era as relevent to those under the age of grace. So I can see how you would make the mistake, but really for those times those laws had a purpose. the not eating shellfish was because they aren't always clean or if you don't cook them right you can get sick for example. There is also laws saying free debts every 7 years or not planting every 7th year. These where based on reason, IE if you plant wheat every year forever in the same field you deplete it of nutrients etc. Or to stop you from holding slaves forever.

All those laws you mention have a reason even if it doesn't make sense to us(in unregenerate state). Yes under the law was a harsh time but you can't take that in some attempt to make a religion something its not, and say it applies to us in the age of grace.

The "Age of Grace"? That sounds like a load to me, but I'll go with the flow. But, I have to ask a simple question: Why are the other passages archaic and no longer relevant, but the one about homosexuality is still alright? Could it be because you're using your holy book as a justification for you to be small minded and ignorant? Using your diety's supposed hatred of homosexuality to back up your bigotry, perhaps?

You really should read your holy book, it states many times that this god fellow loves all people equally with an unending perfect love. So, he can't very well hate homosexuals since they fall under the heading of "all people".

Also, keep in mind that most mental health professionals agree on the root causes of homophobia, namely that you have repressed feelings of latent homosexuality yourself and you lash out against homosexuals as your own way of dealing with your own desires to engage in homosexual behavior. Instead of being a homophobe just go fellate a dude, you'll feel better in the end...the rear end...nooch!

Yes God does love homosexuals. But, you can disagree/hate the sin without a hatred for the individual. Because you forbid you child from something and have a punishment in store if they do said action does not make you hate them. Same with God and homosexuality, stealing, lying, etc. He hates the sin but loves the individual.

As far as selecting which passages I believe or whatnot. Well you have to look at the context under which a passage was written. The jewish people were in the old testament under a theocracy(until the time of saul and david) and God had certain laws that applied only to the jews(ie circumcision). In the age of grace(the new testament after Christ died) the law was thrown out for the jewish people as a prerequisite for salvation, since it was now faith based rather than works. Also IIRC homosexuality was banned in the new testament, even if not it falls under premarital sex/ lasciviousness. God bans premarital sex, and marriage in the Bible is only between a man and woman. After marriage God gives his okay for sex, this is also why many Christians are big on abstinence.

I don't have a fear of gays, I hear the "your secretly afraid your gay so you hate gays" thing all the time. It seems like such a throwaway argument. Do I hate communism because I have some innate fear that I'm secretly communist? No. Likewise my dislike of homosexuality(not the gays themselves) stems from a logic derived from my beliefs. You might claim (and legitimately so) that the logic is faulty(in your eyes) but that doesn't make me a homophobe.

 

[SenseOfTumour]

Look at everyone on TV you've ever seen, they're all either gay or bisexual, they're just not stereotypically showing it.

Glad to help.

I'm with the above people who've pretty much stated, most people will only register a character as gay, if he (a) acts all campy, or (b) kisses or makes sexual moves on another man. (I'm speaking from the male viewpoint here).

I've only seen rare bits of 'House' for example, but having not seen him dating or leering at a woman, its quite possible to me that he's gay.

To me really, however, I feel we're moving in the right direction where some gay people are being portrayed as just regular guys who happen to prefer men romantically.

Also, remembering the occasional times I saw 'Will and Grace', yes THAT. While I can't remember names, one was flaming stereotype and the other was more subtle, still as subtle as a sledgehammer, it being a bog standard sitcom, but it's not like every gay character was exactly the same.

 

[SenseOfTumour]

I think that's kinda the point of the whole topic.

'Normal' (and that's a debate for another day), gay people are all around us, they're just not rollerblading past you in hotpants and glitter and a ' I love cock in my butt' t shirt.

They're just nodding as you come into work in the morning and going 'Hi Dave, did ya see the game at the weekend?' and going drinking after work and doing all the other stuff.

Also, they're a minority, I don't pretend to either know the figures or care enough to back up my meandering with facts, but another reason I've not met many gay people, is the same reason I've never met a guy from Luxembourg, there's not many around me.

The way I see it, if I found my friends were gay, it wouldn't even be relevant, because with my self image , I couldnt for a moment believe they'd find me attractive, heh.

 

[Labyrinth]

The issue here is really audience. If you were to have a main character option as homosexual, that'd be find for things like RPG games but anything else would feel unusual. Because most people aren't homosexual they're unlikely to connect and play with a first-person character who is. A third-person character would be more likely but even then it'd be more difficult to insert oneself into it. How would you present their sexuality anyway? Having a back story with a same-sex partner seems an obvious possibility.

Homosexual NPCs are something else, but portraying them becomes difficult because it's difficult to do without relying on cliche. If you don't wish to go for stereotypes you could find it really hard.

I doubt it's helped by homophobia on the internet and on gaming forums and the like. I just don't see developers doing something which at first glance appears so shockingly unprofitable.

 

[Retoru]

Really this amuses me, how can you take the old testament (under the law or "under the blood") and relate it to the age of grace, or the church age? As a non christian I guess you would assume laws meant for the jewish people in the old testament (under the law) era as relevent to those under the age of grace. So I can see how you would make the mistake, but really for those times those laws had a purpose. the not eating shellfish was because they aren't always clean or if you don't cook them right you can get sick for example. There is also laws saying free debts every 7 years or not planting every 7th year. These where based on reason, IE if you plant wheat every year forever in the same field you deplete it of nutrients etc. Or to stop you from holding slaves forever.

All those laws you mention have a reason even if it doesn't make sense to us(in unregenerate state). Yes under the law was a harsh time but you can't take that in some attempt to make a religion something its not, and say it applies to us in the age of grace.

The "Age of Grace"? That sounds like a load to me, but I'll go with the flow. But, I have to ask a simple question: Why are the other passages archaic and no longer relevant, but the one about homosexuality is still alright? Could it be because you're using your holy book as a justification for you to be small minded and ignorant? Using your diety's supposed hatred of homosexuality to back up your bigotry, perhaps?

You really should read your holy book, it states many times that this god fellow loves all people equally with an unending perfect love. So, he can't very well hate homosexuals since they fall under the heading of "all people".

Also, keep in mind that most mental health professionals agree on the root causes of homophobia, namely that you have repressed feelings of latent homosexuality yourself and you lash out against homosexuals as your own way of dealing with your own desires to engage in homosexual behavior. Instead of being a homophobe just go fellate a dude, you'll feel better in the end...the rear end...nooch!

Yes God does love homosexuals. But, you can disagree/hate the sin without a hatred for the individual. Because you forbid you child from something and have a punishment in store if they do said action does not make you hate them. Same with God and homosexuality, stealing, lying, etc. He hates the sin but loves the individual.

As far as selecting which passages I believe or whatnot. Well you have to look at the context under which a passage was written. The jewish people were in the old testament under a theocracy(until the time of saul and david) and God had certain laws that applied only to the jews(ie circumcision). In the age of grace(the new testament after Christ died) the law was thrown out for the jewish people as a prerequisite for salvation, since it was now faith based rather than works. Also IIRC homosexuality was banned in the new testament, even if not it falls under premarital sex/ lasciviousness. God bans premarital sex, and marriage in the Bible is only between a man and woman. After marriage God gives his okay for sex, this is also why many Christians are big on abstinence.

I don't have a fear of gays, I hear the "your secretly afraid your gay so you hate gays" thing all the time. It seems like such a throwaway argument. Do I hate communism because I have some innate fear that I'm secretly communist? No. Likewise my dislike of homosexuality(not the gays themselves) stems from a logic derived from my beliefs. You might claim (and legitimately so) that the logic is faulty(in your eyes) but that doesn't make me a homophobe.

Your hatred of homosexuality makes you a homophobe, all we're trying to do is get to the root of your hatred. Honestly, hatred for anything is not a healthy emotion. The worst thing that man can do is hate his fellow man, no matter what the reason. I don't care for terrorists, but I don't hate them. I don't agree with Christians, but I don't hate them. Hell, I think you're a pigheaded, ignorant bigot, but I don't hate you. You're misguided, that's for sure, but you're still a person and deserve my compassion.

I still think you cherry pick the bible for your own purposes. How about Mark 10:11-12 "Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her; and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery." Are divorcees all going to hell? Jesus said so in the Gospel of Mark.

Or maybe James 4:17 "Those who know the good they ought to do and do not do it, sin." According to the words of Jesus in this book we're all going to hell since we don't do good, though we know we should. I do good deeds, but I know I could do more, and in knowing that I am sinning, thus I'm going to hell. Damn, Jesus was a strict mamajama wasn't he?

All I'm saying is you have to stop selectively choosing what is and is not relevant today. Either it's all relevant or none of it is relevant. So, which is it? Are 50% of western adults doomed to an eternity in hell for for getting a divorce? Are nearly all of us doomed for not doing the good we know we could do? Or, maybe we'll all be fine since we're good people in our hearts.

Well, at least I'm a good person in my heart. You're a hate-monger and a hypocrite and will most likely burn in hell. Luckily, hell is a figment of your imagination...so, you'll be fine.