Jimquisition: Mass Effect 3: A Gay Erotic Love Story

[Eomega123]

I......uh......I......

I'm at a loss for words right now. I think I need to go lie down.

 

[SajuukKhar]

No they aren't, otherwise there wouldn't be rules about putting such things in games. It isn't illegal to show homosexuality.

You are aware rules and laws are constantly changing and altering to the current norm and that just because RIGHT NOW there is a rule about it =/= it is necessarily "right"?

there were once laws saying people could be enslaved
there were once rules saying women weren't people
etc. etc.
and they all changed

Not that I want that stuff in game myself, I am just pointing that out.

 

[Rainboq]

I am not particulary trilled by a gay shepard, my problem is that it feels like retconning.

Realizing I'm cutting your whole rant just to bash on this one staement but I have to. This is a BS argument for several reasons.
1. A lot of people will START at ME3, and a game should, while taking it's legacy in account, try and be a stand alone work. Anyone starting at 3 have no history to "betray" by playing GayShep
2. You can play ME1 and 2 with the intention of being GayShep, but not finding a suitable partner. RPG options 4 the win.
3. People come out as gay in every period of their lives. He could have been in the closet or just bi-sexual untill now. Again, roleplay.
4 I can play as the SAME Sheppard but with different faces and different personality in all three games. They let me fuck up my own history if I want to, why on earth would that freedome not be extended to sexuality.
5 it's a friggin OPTION! If it messes with YOUR Sheppard, he can be as straight as you want to. I wanna give it to Garrus up the arse, why would you care if I do that?

Well if we accomodatd your Shepard then what about the people that want to be able to bugger livestock with their Shepard? Are they not as important as the gay crowd? What about the people out there that want a pedo Shepard? Do we accommodate them too and maybe throw a couple little boys on the ship? These are all just options after all.

One: Gays are a fairly significant percentage of the population. Two: Those things you mentioned are ILLEGAL.

Foot fetishists are fairly common too, do we need a foot sex scene?

That would mean that someone prominent within the company would want that, or there would have to be a large public outcry over it.

I am not particulary trilled by a gay shepard, my problem is that it feels like retconning.

Realizing I'm cutting your whole rant just to bash on this one staement but I have to. This is a BS argument for several reasons.
1. A lot of people will START at ME3, and a game should, while taking it's legacy in account, try and be a stand alone work. Anyone starting at 3 have no history to "betray" by playing GayShep
2. You can play ME1 and 2 with the intention of being GayShep, but not finding a suitable partner.
RPG options 4 the win.
3. People come out as gay in every period of their lives. He could have been in the closet or just bi-sexual untill now. Again, roleplay.
4 I can play as the SAME Sheppard but with different faces and different personality in all three games. They let me fuck up my own history if I want to, why on earth would that freedome not be extended to sexuality.
5 it's a friggin OPTION! If it messes with YOUR Sheppard, he can be as straight as you want to. I wanna give it to Garrus up the arse, why would you care if I do that?

Well if we accomodatd your Shepard then what about the people that want to be able to bugger livestock with their Shepard? Are they not as important as the gay crowd? What about the people out there that want a pedo Shepard? Do we accommodate them too and maybe throw a couple little boys on the ship? These are all just options after all.

One: Gays are a fairly significant percentage of the population. Two: Those things you mentioned are ILLEGAL.

Hey those are just options. They wouldn't affect your Shepard. You dont like em don't use em. As for being illega, well we illegal things in games all the time so I fail to see how that's relevant. What you and those like you are really saying though isn't let's be open minded and accommodate all sorts of different people but rather simply just to accommodate you and those like you while everyone else can piss off.

Its not that I do or don't want to accommodate those people, but games with that sort of content would lose first amendment protection and be taken off of shelves.

 

[Rainboq]

I said homosexuality in and of itself. Meaning that homosexuality itself means nothing other than attraction. Context is important, and without context, something like homosexuality means little other than an attribute of ones character, like a preference towards a certain colour or genre. Harmless by itself, but it can potentially have consequences for those who are homosexual (see centuries of prosecution and execution) and the actions of those who are (Like rape, for example).

Your arguing over symantics now.

I'm arguing semantics because you misunderstood and misconstrued my argument.

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

I am not particulary trilled by a gay shepard, my problem is that it feels like retconning.

Realizing I'm cutting your whole rant just to bash on this one staement but I have to. This is a BS argument for several reasons.
1. A lot of people will START at ME3, and a game should, while taking it's legacy in account, try and be a stand alone work. Anyone starting at 3 have no history to "betray" by playing GayShep
2. You can play ME1 and 2 with the intention of being GayShep, but not finding a suitable partner.
RPG options 4 the win.
3. People come out as gay in every period of their lives. He could have been in the closet or just bi-sexual untill now. Again, roleplay.
4 I can play as the SAME Sheppard but with different faces and different personality in all three games. They let me fuck up my own history if I want to, why on earth would that freedome not be extended to sexuality.
5 it's a friggin OPTION! If it messes with YOUR Sheppard, he can be as straight as you want to. I wanna give it to Garrus up the arse, why would you care if I do that?

Well if we accomodatd your Shepard then what about the people that want to be able to bugger livestock with their Shepard? Are they not as important as the gay crowd? What about the people out there that want a pedo Shepard? Do we accommodate them too and maybe throw a couple little boys on the ship? These are all just options after all.

One: Gays are a fairly significant percentage of the population. Two: Those things you mentioned are ILLEGAL.

Hey those are just options. They wouldn't affect your Shepard. You dont like em don't use em. As for being illega, well we illegal things in games all the time so I fail to see how that's relevant. What you and those like you are really saying though isn't let's be open minded and accommodate all sorts of different people but rather simply just to accommodate you and those like you while everyone else can piss off.

Homosexuality is not the same as pedophilia and bestiality due to their non-consensual nature. Your point is moot. Morally it's similar to the reason we can't officially kill children or torture animals in games.

what? So why can we torture people in video games(the Punisher for PS2)? I don't that the characters in the game would be willing to be tortured.

 

[secretsantaone]

Well would that have been in and some other DLC be released at launch instead?

And we're getting further down the rabbit hole.

Does Occam's Razor mean anything to you?

The hell does Occam's Razor have to do with anything? It has no relevance in the context that I was talking about, let alone is it some be all and end all to arguments.

Stop saying things to seem smarter than you are.

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

That's rape, not homosexuality. Homosexuality is simply being attracted to another of the same sex, how one acts based on that has nothing to do with homosexuality itself, but rather the individuals past experiences.

And why not, what's wrong with a phallus?

You made a sweeping generalization that homosexuality has never hurt anybody, I called bs because it has(i.e. people have committed crimes because of it). Now I'm not saying that all homosexuals are bad people(because their not) just that it is ignorant of you to say that no homosexual has ever hurt anybody because their homosexual.

bi?

I didn't make a comment about the option for being gay, I made a comment about a sweeping generalization.

well you seem to have a problem with the whole thing

Foot fetishists are fairly common too, do we need a foot sex scene?

Damn it! Stop with the fetish suggestions or you will get me banned from this forums!

Also for me is like having a vegetarian dish in the menu, I will probably skip it because buying veggies in a fine restaurant is for suckers, but always nice to see it.

Not if it comes at the expense of a poorer quality game.

for fucks sake...its not going to ruin the game...in previous games you could bang aliens now if that didnt ruin the game (which surprise surprise it didnt) then I dont see how shepard having a 30 second scene with another man is going to ruin the game

Because it's not a 30 second scene. It's a series of dialogue trees, written scenarios, coding, animations, voice acting and testing, all of which takes up a lot of development time. Development time which could have been spent adding more content or improving on existing content.

Add into that the excuses Bioware will have to write up due to not making any mention of it in the previous 2 games, the possibilities of falsely initiating it just by being friendly ala DA2 and the obvious pandering to knee-jerk accusations of homophobia, it all seems more trouble than it's worth. Does the gay community now feel vindicated because a virtual character can stick it up a guys arse?

Would the Day 1 dlc have been in the main game if Bioware didn't feel they had to put a gay romance in?

But it's ok to have all those things for Heterosexual couples?

That's rape, not homosexuality. Homosexuality is simply being attracted to another of the same sex, how one acts based on that has nothing to do with homosexuality itself, but rather the individuals past experiences.

And why not, what's wrong with a phallus?

You made a sweeping generalization that homosexuality has never hurt anybody, I called bs because it has(i.e. people have committed crimes because of it). Now I'm not saying that all homosexuals are bad people(because their not) just that it is ignorant of you to say that no homosexual has ever hurt anybody because their homosexual.

I hope you understand that sexual crimes are largely committed by straight people.

Not because straight people are more likely to be deviants, but because the percentage of straight is larger than gay, where I'm willing to wager the percentage of sex criminals is probably roughly similar.

I do realize that, which is why I would never say that heterosexuality has never harmed anybody, because obviously it has. Don't get me wrong, that doesn't mean I'm saying that heterosexuality/homosexuality=sexual crimes, it just means that a persons sexual desire/lust/preference has hurt a few people.

Would you say the same of a straight person? i.e, that their heterosexuality caused them to commit a crime?

I believe I did just that when I responded to jovack22

 

[Xanthious]

I am not particulary trilled by a gay shepard, my problem is that it feels like retconning.

Realizing I'm cutting your whole rant just to bash on this one staement but I have to. This is a BS argument for several reasons.
1. A lot of people will START at ME3, and a game should, while taking it's legacy in account, try and be a stand alone work. Anyone starting at 3 have no history to "betray" by playing GayShep
2. You can play ME1 and 2 with the intention of being GayShep, but not finding a suitable partner.
RPG options 4 the win.
3. People come out as gay in every period of their lives. He could have been in the closet or just bi-sexual untill now. Again, roleplay.
4 I can play as the SAME Sheppard but with different faces and different personality in all three games. They let me fuck up my own history if I want to, why on earth would that freedome not be extended to sexuality.
5 it's a friggin OPTION! If it messes with YOUR Sheppard, he can be as straight as you want to. I wanna give it to Garrus up the arse, why would you care if I do that?

Well if we accomodatd your Shepard then what about the people that want to be able to bugger livestock with their Shepard? Are they not as important as the gay crowd? What about the people out there that want a pedo Shepard? Do we accommodate them too and maybe throw a couple little boys on the ship? These are all just options after all.

One: Gays are a fairly significant percentage of the population. Two: Those things you mentioned are ILLEGAL.

Hey those are just options. They wouldn't affect your Shepard. You dont like em don't use em. As for being illega, well we illegal things in games all the time so I fail to see how that's relevant. What you and those like you are really saying though isn't let's be open minded and accommodate all sorts of different people but rather simply just to accommodate you and those like you while everyone else can piss off.

Homosexuality is not the same as pedophilia and bestiality due to their non-consensual nature. Your point is moot. Morally it's similar to the reason we can't officially kill children or torture animals in games.

In a game they are exactly the same. Just ones and zeros. In reality there may be but in a game all that changes is the pixels. Again, why does one minority group deserve special treatment over any other. I say accommodate em all.

No they aren't, otherwise there wouldn't be rules about putting such things in games. It isn't illegal to show homosexuality.

Thete are no such rules in place. In the US that'd all be covered by freedom of expression.

What gets me is the same people who celebrated getting a gay Shepard are showing just how hypocritical they are. You wanted the line pushed forward and attacked those that wanted to keep it where it was. Now that you got what you want you are all for denying people the same thing. Why is it that you get say on what should or shouldn't be put in the game when you've already forced your options on others.

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

I said homosexuality in and of itself. Meaning that homosexuality itself means nothing other than attraction. Context is important, and without context, something like homosexuality means little other than an attribute of ones character, like a preference towards a certain colour or genre. Harmless by itself, but it can potentially have consequences for those who are homosexual (see centuries of prosecution and execution) and the actions of those who are (Like rape, for example).

Your arguing over symantics now.

I'm arguing semantics because you misunderstood and misconstrued my argument.

No you made it sound like no homosexual person has ever committed a sexually based crime before, which I called bullshit on.

 

[secretsantaone]

That's rape, not homosexuality. Homosexuality is simply being attracted to another of the same sex, how one acts based on that has nothing to do with homosexuality itself, but rather the individuals past experiences.

And why not, what's wrong with a phallus?

You made a sweeping generalization that homosexuality has never hurt anybody, I called bs because it has(i.e. people have committed crimes because of it). Now I'm not saying that all homosexuals are bad people(because their not) just that it is ignorant of you to say that no homosexual has ever hurt anybody because their homosexual.

bi?

I didn't make a comment about the option for being gay, I made a comment about a sweeping generalization.

well you seem to have a problem with the whole thing

Foot fetishists are fairly common too, do we need a foot sex scene?

Damn it! Stop with the fetish suggestions or you will get me banned from this forums!

Also for me is like having a vegetarian dish in the menu, I will probably skip it because buying veggies in a fine restaurant is for suckers, but always nice to see it.

Not if it comes at the expense of a poorer quality game.

for fucks sake...its not going to ruin the game...in previous games you could bang aliens now if that didnt ruin the game (which surprise surprise it didnt) then I dont see how shepard having a 30 second scene with another man is going to ruin the game

Because it's not a 30 second scene. It's a series of dialogue trees, written scenarios, coding, animations, voice acting and testing, all of which takes up a lot of development time. Development time which could have been spent adding more content or improving on existing content.

Add into that the excuses Bioware will have to write up due to not making any mention of it in the previous 2 games, the possibilities of falsely initiating it just by being friendly ala DA2 and the obvious pandering to knee-jerk accusations of homophobia, it all seems more trouble than it's worth. Does the gay community now feel vindicated because a virtual character can stick it up a guys arse?

Would the Day 1 dlc have been in the main game if Bioware didn't feel they had to put a gay romance in?

But it's ok to have all those things for Heterosexual couples?

If it's already been established in a previous game, yes. Do I think they should add more heterosexual relationships in game 3 at the expense of development time? No.

 

[Avatar Roku]

That's rape, not homosexuality. Homosexuality is simply being attracted to another of the same sex, how one acts based on that has nothing to do with homosexuality itself, but rather the individuals past experiences.

And why not, what's wrong with a phallus?

You made a sweeping generalization that homosexuality has never hurt anybody, I called bs because it has(i.e. people have committed crimes because of it). Now I'm not saying that all homosexuals are bad people(because their not) just that it is ignorant of you to say that no homosexual has ever hurt anybody because their homosexual.

bi?

I didn't make a comment about the option for being gay, I made a comment about a sweeping generalization.

well you seem to have a problem with the whole thing

Foot fetishists are fairly common too, do we need a foot sex scene?

Damn it! Stop with the fetish suggestions or you will get me banned from this forums!

Also for me is like having a vegetarian dish in the menu, I will probably skip it because buying veggies in a fine restaurant is for suckers, but always nice to see it.

Not if it comes at the expense of a poorer quality game.

for fucks sake...its not going to ruin the game...in previous games you could bang aliens now if that didnt ruin the game (which surprise surprise it didnt) then I dont see how shepard having a 30 second scene with another man is going to ruin the game

Because it's not a 30 second scene. It's a series of dialogue trees, written scenarios, coding, animations, voice acting and testing, all of which takes up a lot of development time. Development time which could have been spent adding more content or improving on existing content.

Add into that the excuses Bioware will have to write up due to not making any mention of it in the previous 2 games, the possibilities of falsely initiating it just by being friendly ala DA2 and the obvious pandering to knee-jerk accusations of homophobia, it all seems more trouble than it's worth. Does the gay community now feel vindicated because a virtual character can stick it up a guys arse?

Would the Day 1 dlc have been in the main game if Bioware didn't feel they had to put a gay romance in?

But it's ok to have all those things for Heterosexual couples?

That's rape, not homosexuality. Homosexuality is simply being attracted to another of the same sex, how one acts based on that has nothing to do with homosexuality itself, but rather the individuals past experiences.

And why not, what's wrong with a phallus?

You made a sweeping generalization that homosexuality has never hurt anybody, I called bs because it has(i.e. people have committed crimes because of it). Now I'm not saying that all homosexuals are bad people(because their not) just that it is ignorant of you to say that no homosexual has ever hurt anybody because their homosexual.

I hope you understand that sexual crimes are largely committed by straight people.

Not because straight people are more likely to be deviants, but because the percentage of straight is larger than gay, where I'm willing to wager the percentage of sex criminals is probably roughly similar.

I do realize that, which is why I would never say that heterosexuality has never harmed anybody, because obviously it has. Don't get me wrong, that doesn't mean I'm saying that heterosexuality/homosexuality=sexual crimes, it just means that a persons sexual desire/lust/preference has hurt a few people.

Would you say the same of a straight person? i.e, that their heterosexuality caused them to commit a crime?

I believe I did just that when I responded to jovack22

I apologize. It's a very long thread, it would not surprise me if I missed a couple posts.

However, there's one slight thing I need to argue:

I said homosexuality in and of itself. Meaning that homosexuality itself means nothing other than attraction. Context is important, and without context, something like homosexuality means little other than an attribute of ones character, like a preference towards a certain colour or genre. Harmless by itself, but it can potentially have consequences for those who are homosexual (see centuries of prosecution and execution) and the actions of those who are (Like rape, for example).

Your arguing over symantics now.

I'm arguing semantics because you misunderstood and misconstrued my argument.

No you made it sound like no homosexual person has ever committed a sexually based crime before, which I called bullshit on.

Just because a crime is sexually based does not mean that a person's orientation is the cause. It's incidental, it's the fact that the person is fucked up that is the actual cause.

 

[Rainboq]

I said homosexuality in and of itself. Meaning that homosexuality itself means nothing other than attraction. Context is important, and without context, something like homosexuality means little other than an attribute of ones character, like a preference towards a certain colour or genre. Harmless by itself, but it can potentially have consequences for those who are homosexual (see centuries of prosecution and execution) and the actions of those who are (Like rape, for example).

Your arguing over symantics now.

I'm arguing semantics because you misunderstood and misconstrued my argument.

No you made it sound like no homosexual person has ever committed a sexually based crime before, which I called bullshit on.

No, what I said was that homosexuality is nothing but an adjective. It has, nor done anything other than mean that a being is attracted to another of the same sex. Therefore, it is not a bad thing itself. What people do with that attraction is not the fault of homosexuality itself.

 

[secretsantaone]

I am not particulary trilled by a gay shepard, my problem is that it feels like retconning.

Realizing I'm cutting your whole rant just to bash on this one staement but I have to. This is a BS argument for several reasons.
1. A lot of people will START at ME3, and a game should, while taking it's legacy in account, try and be a stand alone work. Anyone starting at 3 have no history to "betray" by playing GayShep
2. You can play ME1 and 2 with the intention of being GayShep, but not finding a suitable partner. RPG options 4 the win.
3. People come out as gay in every period of their lives. He could have been in the closet or just bi-sexual untill now. Again, roleplay.
4 I can play as the SAME Sheppard but with different faces and different personality in all three games. They let me fuck up my own history if I want to, why on earth would that freedome not be extended to sexuality.
5 it's a friggin OPTION! If it messes with YOUR Sheppard, he can be as straight as you want to. I wanna give it to Garrus up the arse, why would you care if I do that?

Well if we accomodatd your Shepard then what about the people that want to be able to bugger livestock with their Shepard? Are they not as important as the gay crowd? What about the people out there that want a pedo Shepard? Do we accommodate them too and maybe throw a couple little boys on the ship? These are all just options after all.

One: Gays are a fairly significant percentage of the population. Two: Those things you mentioned are ILLEGAL.

Foot fetishists are fairly common too, do we need a foot sex scene?

That would mean that someone prominent within the company would want that, or there would have to be a large public outcry over it.

So what you're basically saying is that the only reason there's a gay romance in Mass Effect 3 is because gay people are more whiny?

 

[I Max95]

i can't beleive i sat through that
...

what was the point again?
was it commenting on all the idiots who complain about the option to be gay in Video games, cause those voices aren't really that much of an issue

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

That's rape, not homosexuality. Homosexuality is simply being attracted to another of the same sex, how one acts based on that has nothing to do with homosexuality itself, but rather the individuals past experiences.

And why not, what's wrong with a phallus?

You made a sweeping generalization that homosexuality has never hurt anybody, I called bs because it has(i.e. people have committed crimes because of it). Now I'm not saying that all homosexuals are bad people(because their not) just that it is ignorant of you to say that no homosexual has ever hurt anybody because their homosexual.

bi?

I didn't make a comment about the option for being gay, I made a comment about a sweeping generalization.

well you seem to have a problem with the whole thing

Foot fetishists are fairly common too, do we need a foot sex scene?

Damn it! Stop with the fetish suggestions or you will get me banned from this forums!

Also for me is like having a vegetarian dish in the menu, I will probably skip it because buying veggies in a fine restaurant is for suckers, but always nice to see it.

Not if it comes at the expense of a poorer quality game.

for fucks sake...its not going to ruin the game...in previous games you could bang aliens now if that didnt ruin the game (which surprise surprise it didnt) then I dont see how shepard having a 30 second scene with another man is going to ruin the game

Because it's not a 30 second scene. It's a series of dialogue trees, written scenarios, coding, animations, voice acting and testing, all of which takes up a lot of development time. Development time which could have been spent adding more content or improving on existing content.

Add into that the excuses Bioware will have to write up due to not making any mention of it in the previous 2 games, the possibilities of falsely initiating it just by being friendly ala DA2 and the obvious pandering to knee-jerk accusations of homophobia, it all seems more trouble than it's worth. Does the gay community now feel vindicated because a virtual character can stick it up a guys arse?

Would the Day 1 dlc have been in the main game if Bioware didn't feel they had to put a gay romance in?

But it's ok to have all those things for Heterosexual couples?

That's rape, not homosexuality. Homosexuality is simply being attracted to another of the same sex, how one acts based on that has nothing to do with homosexuality itself, but rather the individuals past experiences.

And why not, what's wrong with a phallus?

You made a sweeping generalization that homosexuality has never hurt anybody, I called bs because it has(i.e. people have committed crimes because of it). Now I'm not saying that all homosexuals are bad people(because their not) just that it is ignorant of you to say that no homosexual has ever hurt anybody because their homosexual.

I hope you understand that sexual crimes are largely committed by straight people.

Not because straight people are more likely to be deviants, but because the percentage of straight is larger than gay, where I'm willing to wager the percentage of sex criminals is probably roughly similar.

I do realize that, which is why I would never say that heterosexuality has never harmed anybody, because obviously it has. Don't get me wrong, that doesn't mean I'm saying that heterosexuality/homosexuality=sexual crimes, it just means that a persons sexual desire/lust/preference has hurt a few people.

Would you say the same of a straight person? i.e, that their heterosexuality caused them to commit a crime?

I believe I did just that when I responded to jovack22

I apologize. It's a very long thread, it would not surprise me if I missed a couple posts.

However, there's one slight thing I need to argue:

I said homosexuality in and of itself. Meaning that homosexuality itself means nothing other than attraction. Context is important, and without context, something like homosexuality means little other than an attribute of ones character, like a preference towards a certain colour or genre. Harmless by itself, but it can potentially have consequences for those who are homosexual (see centuries of prosecution and execution) and the actions of those who are (Like rape, for example).

Your arguing over symantics now.

I'm arguing semantics because you misunderstood and misconstrued my argument.

No you made it sound like no homosexual person has ever committed a sexually based crime before, which I called bullshit on.

Just because a crime is sexually based does not mean that a person's orientation is the cause. It's incidental, it's the fact that the person is fucked up that is the actual cause.

The claim was that no homosexual has ever committed a sexually based crime was what I was calling bullshit on

 

[Slayer_2]

I'm pretty sure no one actually has problems with ME3 having homo relationships in it. Especially when bigger issues are obvious *cough* Origin *cough*.

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

I said homosexuality in and of itself. Meaning that homosexuality itself means nothing other than attraction. Context is important, and without context, something like homosexuality means little other than an attribute of ones character, like a preference towards a certain colour or genre. Harmless by itself, but it can potentially have consequences for those who are homosexual (see centuries of prosecution and execution) and the actions of those who are (Like rape, for example).

Your arguing over symantics now.

I'm arguing semantics because you misunderstood and misconstrued my argument.

No you made it sound like no homosexual person has ever committed a sexually based crime before, which I called bullshit on.

No, what I said was that homosexuality is nothing but an adjective. It has, nor done anything other than mean that a being is attracted to another of the same sex. Therefore, it is not a bad thing itself. What people do with that attraction is not the fault of homosexuality itself.

Your original comment came off as otherwise, and that was what I was calling bs on

 

[Daystar Clarion]

I say, that was rather inappropriate.

Glad I hid the women.

*sips tea*

Yes, quite.

 

[Avatar Roku]

That's rape, not homosexuality. Homosexuality is simply being attracted to another of the same sex, how one acts based on that has nothing to do with homosexuality itself, but rather the individuals past experiences.

And why not, what's wrong with a phallus?

You made a sweeping generalization that homosexuality has never hurt anybody, I called bs because it has(i.e. people have committed crimes because of it). Now I'm not saying that all homosexuals are bad people(because their not) just that it is ignorant of you to say that no homosexual has ever hurt anybody because their homosexual.

bi?

I didn't make a comment about the option for being gay, I made a comment about a sweeping generalization.

well you seem to have a problem with the whole thing

Foot fetishists are fairly common too, do we need a foot sex scene?

Damn it! Stop with the fetish suggestions or you will get me banned from this forums!

Also for me is like having a vegetarian dish in the menu, I will probably skip it because buying veggies in a fine restaurant is for suckers, but always nice to see it.

Not if it comes at the expense of a poorer quality game.

for fucks sake...its not going to ruin the game...in previous games you could bang aliens now if that didnt ruin the game (which surprise surprise it didnt) then I dont see how shepard having a 30 second scene with another man is going to ruin the game

Because it's not a 30 second scene. It's a series of dialogue trees, written scenarios, coding, animations, voice acting and testing, all of which takes up a lot of development time. Development time which could have been spent adding more content or improving on existing content.

Add into that the excuses Bioware will have to write up due to not making any mention of it in the previous 2 games, the possibilities of falsely initiating it just by being friendly ala DA2 and the obvious pandering to knee-jerk accusations of homophobia, it all seems more trouble than it's worth. Does the gay community now feel vindicated because a virtual character can stick it up a guys arse?

Would the Day 1 dlc have been in the main game if Bioware didn't feel they had to put a gay romance in?

But it's ok to have all those things for Heterosexual couples?

That's rape, not homosexuality. Homosexuality is simply being attracted to another of the same sex, how one acts based on that has nothing to do with homosexuality itself, but rather the individuals past experiences.

And why not, what's wrong with a phallus?

You made a sweeping generalization that homosexuality has never hurt anybody, I called bs because it has(i.e. people have committed crimes because of it). Now I'm not saying that all homosexuals are bad people(because their not) just that it is ignorant of you to say that no homosexual has ever hurt anybody because their homosexual.

I hope you understand that sexual crimes are largely committed by straight people.

Not because straight people are more likely to be deviants, but because the percentage of straight is larger than gay, where I'm willing to wager the percentage of sex criminals is probably roughly similar.

I do realize that, which is why I would never say that heterosexuality has never harmed anybody, because obviously it has. Don't get me wrong, that doesn't mean I'm saying that heterosexuality/homosexuality=sexual crimes, it just means that a persons sexual desire/lust/preference has hurt a few people.

Would you say the same of a straight person? i.e, that their heterosexuality caused them to commit a crime?

I believe I did just that when I responded to jovack22

I apologize. It's a very long thread, it would not surprise me if I missed a couple posts.

However, there's one slight thing I need to argue:

I said homosexuality in and of itself. Meaning that homosexuality itself means nothing other than attraction. Context is important, and without context, something like homosexuality means little other than an attribute of ones character, like a preference towards a certain colour or genre. Harmless by itself, but it can potentially have consequences for those who are homosexual (see centuries of prosecution and execution) and the actions of those who are (Like rape, for example).

Your arguing over symantics now.

I'm arguing semantics because you misunderstood and misconstrued my argument.

No you made it sound like no homosexual person has ever committed a sexually based crime before, which I called bullshit on.

Just because a crime is sexually based does not mean that a person's orientation is the cause. It's incidental, it's the fact that the person is fucked up that is the actual cause.

The claim was that no homosexual has ever committed a sexually based crime was what I was calling bullshit on

No, it wasn't:

Well why not? Homosexuality never hurt anyone in and of itself.

That's rape, not homosexuality. Homosexuality is simply being attracted to another of the same sex, how one acts based on that has nothing to do with homosexuality itself, but rather the individuals past experiences.

The claim was the same thing we are arguing: that homosexuality in and of itself is not a cause for those crimes.
EDIT: Quotes don't have links because I'm lazy. I can provide linked quotes if you want, but they're both just further back on this quote tree.

 

[LobsterFeng]

Why did I watch all of that? Those words are now forever burned into my memory. I wish I could uninstall my brain.