Ludeon Forums

Milon says:
These posts were split off from another thread (https://ludeon.com/forums/index.php?topic=18664.0) in the Suggestions forum.  The thread was clearly becoming 2 separate issues, so I split the off topic one here.  Many posts contained both on-topic and off-topic comments, and I can't (and wouldn't) split parts of a post.  I apologize if you don't like how I divided things. Let's keep this thread for the off-topic discussion that was evolving, and keep the thread in the Suggestions forum for making & discussing suggestinos about RimWorld.  Finally, you guys have done well keeping it together on a touchy issue.  I have faith that this will continue, which is why I spent a lot of personal time on this, and didn't just lock it outright.

PS - I have no idea why the thread subject went insane.  Sorry about that too.

These kinds of threads are why i wish gay was never added,  because lgbt people argue over how it should be,  and in a simulation game simulating so detailed,  there will NEVER  be peace because people will want more features for all the super obscure weird alphabet soup of the lgbt  ,  and people will argue over and over "how"  stuff works.

"we need transsexuals now"
"why not make everyone gender fluid,  and love everyone"
"giving a label to things is bad"
"we need to add a gene therapy machine for transsexuals to get new bodies"
"in the future there should be way more lgbt people "

Ect ect

They dont realize if tynan appealed to every single minority,  nothing else would get done  ,  and a lot if these requests would make it worse for players in general.

But I've already said how i think most lgbt people aren't really stable... Oh well.

Guess the arguing about such issues will remain as long as rimworld lives..... Great.  I can only hope eventually the requests and threads stop,  but i doubt it...

Also,  still have not seen one case of someone being thankful gay was even added,  just people insisting it was done wrong, or needs more.

As for children  ,  if you really were stranded,  children would be important,  as if you grow old and frail with no new generation to take care of your sorry ass,  you will be dead.  So procreation in an area where society is what you make of it,  kids would be extremely important in the long run.

Quote from: JesterHell on April 11, 2016, 08:22:03 AM

The only "option" missing is zoosexual which would be good for a laugh at most, although I suppose its just as reasonable as the others.

Uhm... Sorry, heterosexual, and even gay and bisexual are much, MUCH  more reasonable than being into bestiality, or intersexuality, considering the major health risks to both. Sorry. And in reality things can change, asexuals can become straight or gay, straight can become bi, ect. The whole "born that way" trope is utter bs.

And honestly, the whole thing is assuming people would WANT to be tolerant, left to their own devices, in their own society, and to think nobody would have a problem, especially when social structure was just added is plain old silly. In-fact I'm surprised no pawns have dislike towards gay people, that isn't realistic. I mean, I've seen colonists kill each other over insults even when they were friends, whats to say the same might happen if another colonist made them uncomfortable with their "orientation", or insisting being called a different title all the sudden?

also, if there were those into bestiality, would we occasionally run into chinchillas or cats / dogs with internal injuries from it? or an animal mauling someone over a "romance" attempt?

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 11, 2016, 06:49:39 AM
These kinds of threads are why i wish gay was never added,  because lgbt people argue over how it should be,  and in a simulation game simulating so detailed,  there will NEVER  be peace because people will want more features for all the super obscure weird alphabet soup of the lgbt  ,  and people will argue over and over "how"  stuff works.

If ya don't like it so much man, why don't ya just not look in the threads? There are PLENTY of other threads.

Also, as for the repoduction thing - the colonists are colonising this planet (at least according to Ty). They are shipwreK survivors trying to leave. Why would old age and replacement generations even come into it.

If you don't like something,  ignoring is stupid unless you cannot do anything.  I'm speaking out against this stuff.

As for reproduction not being a thing because you "can"  leave,  you realize very few people even build a ship right?

Sorry but i fail to see how even more lgbt elements could be an "interesting game mechanic",  unless it was realistic which would surely be offensive to people.  As is,  gay trait is just "there"   and does nothing for gameplay ,  and others would provide nothing (asexual)  at best,  and be a downright negative trait at worst (transsexual,  zoophile).

I don't think its worth coding such obscure traits which will be annoying to deal with,  be bickered over 10 times as much as this,  and do jack for gameplay when we could instead work on something really interesting,  like doing our own raids.

If it wasn't for people insisting on "the full representation of sexuality",  this idea wouldn't be supported much.  Its suggested because people want inclusion,  nothing more.

And saying they "will exist"  is a silly exist.  I'm sure taking a piss will exist daily for colonists,  doesn't mean i think it should be programmed.  And if it did exist, i think it would be fleeting,  and shunned severely.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 11, 2016, 10:15:17 AMAs for reproduction not being a thing because you "can"  leave,  you realize very few people even build a ship right?

Im all for the game Changing for a survival game to a colony building game. Id fuckin love it. But that's just not what it is. It's the story of 3 ship wreak survivors who want to leave the planet. That's the scenario that Ty set up. Doesn't really matter how people play it.

Also your acting like every thread is a SJW thread about the inclusion of different sexuality when in reality there is one, maybe 2 threads regarding it.

The reason why I'm against it is because its unrealistic, and not just in a "this cannot realistically happen" way, but in an immersion breaking "why would this work in this universe" sort of way... everything has consequences in rimworld, and more extreme sexual traits would have much more extreme outcomes I would think. Someone turning transgender could end with a dramatic cost for mood from dysphoria / immense cost for hormones and surgery, and surgery could end up botched ending in even worse effects, or end up with a fatal infections. And surgery in real life with that is pretty nasty to begin with. Even if we assume we use more advanced methods, like a vat grown penis and testicles or vagina, the cost would be so much that most people would instead use it for replacing organs that were DAMAGED, not that... So it really comes down to, don't add it, add it but have laughable realism and have it be more "token" and "padded", or add it realistically, and get everyone mad.

And for zoophiles, I could see it being problematic with the farming aspect, if someone found out his animal he bonded with was "romanced", I could see a witch hunt happening to avenge the violated, and potentially injured animal. All these things I cannot see happening in a glamorous way, nor flattering, which would cause an outrage, so I figure it is best to not add it, to avoid even more arguments. Which there WOULD be, if added.

Though, hey, if all the sexual traits out there, including sadism was added, and prison was changed to punish / try to re-rehabilitate people, it could make for some dark, and crazy storytelling. Imagine an attempted, or even successful rapist, being flogged as punishment, risking death, but trying to make a spectacle out of it to enforce behavior. Would be even more interesting if you needed that colonist... But that would probably be a bit much for rimworld

Problem is, cannibalism is fairly detached, rape and such carries more weight to it.... I've actually suggested rape in the past as a mental break, but yeah, people weren't comfortable. Problem is, that rabbit hole is slippery as fuck the deeper you go, which is why I'm suggesting we DON'T add more, or if we do, go all out and accept there will be fucked up stuff. Half assing deeper elements of sexuality is just stupid imo

Also, ty didn't really say "this is what your colony is, this is what they do", he leaves what you do extremely open ended, so saying the plot is to get off the planet is a bad argument.

And yeah, there's been a few threads but active ones, before alpha 13 as well...I just don't want to head down that slippery slope.

Quote from: Regret on April 11, 2016, 04:03:49 PM
This subject in this game makes me uncomfortable (for various reasons).

I don't consider that a bad thing, it will be interesting to see how this situation develops.

Believe me I understand, but this will ALSO happen with trans / other traits if added, making people extremely uncomfortable, if not angry over various reasons....

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 11, 2016, 04:11:12 PM

Quote from: Regret on April 11, 2016, 04:03:49 PM
This subject in this game makes me uncomfortable (for various reasons).

I don't consider that a bad thing, it will be interesting to see how this situation develops.

Believe me I understand, but this will ALSO happen with trans / other traits if added, making people extremely uncomfortable, if not angry over various reasons....

Definitely.
I find it strange to agree with someone who implies that transsexuality is as bad as zoophilia.
I'll just assume that wasn't meant to piss transsexuals off.

Eh, I'm getting popcorn and keeping an eye on the situation.
If I were an anthropologist I would be taking notes.

(One more comment for others who like me are interested in observing the members of a society negotiate about their values)
One thing I've noticed is that these discussions tend to devolve in excessive posturing, that hasn't happened here yet.
With posturing I mean every post that starts with "I'm straight/gay/trans/a goat and I have opinion X..." followed by their actual point.

I mean transsexuality is "as bad",  in that murphys law which is pretty much a storyteller in rimworld, will ensure both cause immense problems with colonies. Imagine everything that can go wrong with those.  Now throw in a boomrat exploding from dying of internal bleeding while simultaneously setting a guys wang on fire ... Actually that would be absolutely hilarious.

At the same time,  imagine sexual surgery with a catastrophic botching,  attaching a penis to a guys face or something.  YOU KNOW IT COULD HAPPEN, with rimworld surgeons.

But you are right,  i think rimworld attracts a special kind of person, and inherently creates dialog. One of the reasons i adore this game.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 11, 2016, 06:49:39 AM
These kinds of threads are why i wish gay was never added,  because lgbt people argue over how it should be,  and in a simulation game simulating so detailed,  there will NEVER  be peace because people will want more features for all the super obscure weird alphabet soup of the lgbt  ,  and people will argue over and over "how"  stuff works.

"we need transsexuals now"
"why not make everyone gender fluid,  and love everyone"
"giving a label to things is bad""we need to add a gene therapy machine for transsexuals to get new bodies"
"in the future there should be way more lgbt people "

Ect ect

They dont realize if tynan appealed to every single minority,  nothing else would get done  ,  and a lot if these requests would make it worse for players in general.

But I've already said how i think most lgbt people aren't really stable... Oh well

You need to settle down. Most of the people in the thread are talking about it from a gameplay standpoint - why tie up a trait with "gay" when it can go in the social category and you can have a third trait available? Ironically, you're the one getting angry about it.

I can't speak for everyone, but I've yet to see a colony where children would realistically help. Even if I had ever played long enough to see someone grow old (I haven't) I've never been in so comfortable a situation that I'd even imagine raising dependants. this is a colony, not a society, even when you DO have old colonists, young colonists just help them out.

Quote from: Carlyscarlet on April 11, 2016, 08:03:41 PM
I see this thread has already become a pile of shit with the whole "Gays are breaking my immersion"

Its not the gay trait, but trying to add other stuff without all the gritty, dirty details...that would ruin immersion for me.

And since such gritty details would offend people, yeah...

Though the fact gay colonists are incapable of being shunned for being gay bothers me,  since every other trait pretty much can be viewed badly.

As a transgender woman, I would requrest you to refrain from adding trans with the likes zoophilia. Zoophilia is a paraphilia, not a sexual orientation, and is highly frowned upon. Zoophilia is beastiality and beastiality is always rape because animals are incapable of consenting. On the other hand, transgender is an identity where a persons gender identity doesn't match their biological sex. They are in no way related and  its quite frankly insulting to see them next to each other in the same sentence. I'm not saying you intended to insult, but as a trans person it came off that way.

Also, transgender people added to this game would be... I don't know... difficult. Transgenderness has no effect on gameplay besides character detail. It depends really. Transgender people fully transitioned look almost indiscernible from their gender identity, so new models for them wouldn't be necessary. However, transgender people need to take hormones all their life to maintain their bodies. But then again, this is the future and we've probably got the technology to make it so that trans people are indiscernable to cis people entirely. But thinking about it, that sounds like something only Glitterworld tech or great Urbworld tech could do, not mining and underground colonies.

What I would do is have it come in different stages. Pawns have a chance to be transgender, but based on their background, they are at different stages of transition and look different. If a trans pawn is from an Urbworld/Glitterworld and isn't poor, then they look like the gender they are and have some biological upgrades (hormone regulator or something) on them. If a trans pawn is from anywhere else and/or has a poor background, they look more like their biological sex. Some gameplay things about transpeople would probably be their moods. Fully transitioned transpeople have a permanent mood buff while untransitioned transpeople have a permanent mood debuff. Sort of like the prostophile trait, except instead of bio-augmented parts its hormone replacement. If you transition an untransitioned transperson, you get a pawn with a better mood that is less likely to break, along with them looking like their gender identity.

I don't know about this ever being implemented in vanilla. It would be super sweet if it was. More representation of minorities is great, especially mine. It takes some more dev time, but I feel like it would be worth it. Definitely would recommend this game more to my trans buddies if trans people were included in vanilla.

Quote from: Carlyscarlet on April 11, 2016, 10:11:25 PM
As a transgender woman, I would requrest you to refrain from adding trans with the likes zoophilia. Zoophilia is a paraphilia, not a sexual orientation, and is highly frowned upon. Zoophilia is beastiality and beastiality is always rape because animals are incapable of consenting.

Actually zoophila and bestiality are 2 completely different things, (which I admit many people never even realize or care about the difference,) but that's not really a topic to discuss in this thread/forum. (Though if you're interested to learn the difference, this completely safe for work college essay paper will prove most educational to you: http://fifine.org/whitefangsTexte/86-Englisch.html )

As I mentioned in another thread, in a space faring society with the ability to genetically create war animals (wargs) and self detonating boomalopes swapping someones gender right down to the genetic level would be something of a trival matter that I would expect most colonists would have had taken care of on their home world before boarding the ill fated Rimworld starship.

That said, I do like your idea, and the extra stories it could help create, but once again I think it's something would be better put into a mod since there's lots of other areas of the game that would really benefit from Tynan focusing his efforts on.

The reason I compare the 2 is they both present very real risks and problems to the colony.  Not the same risks but risks

Zoophiles / bestiality (whichever one is an urge for sex with animals) would be risky for hurting / possibly killing animals, mood issues, fights / killing over an assaulted animal, ect, if not the animal violently rejecting the attempt

Transexuals would have a mood debuff, a "need" for hormones, "need" for surgery, which would be a huge financial hardship on the colony. Add onto that health risks, botched surgery risk, infection, social hardship (even if indistinguishable, there are men who can, and will reject even the most passable transsexual woman on the basis of them being transsexual and not a born girl, and getting a truly passable downstairs bit is incredibly difficult, maybe impossible with current techniques) instability emotionally during transition (its called the second puberty after all) and other issues I'm probably forgetting.

Point is, even if added, assuming it wasn't padded in and sugar coated, I think adding it would trigger you, and others WORSE than if it was just flat ignored...

Just think if they were added, and a transsexual got rejected / insulted incessantly by a guy she flirted with... I don't think that would be something you would want to see, much less violent outbursts against them, or botched surgeries killing the person, or other terrible possibilities.

So the exact same thing as prostophile. Yet I don't here the same level of outcry.

And we can avoid the rejection bit by... not having it as a thing that happens in the game. If fact, if that was in fact added I would tell my transfriends to not buy this game for adding trans brutality. We don't have racism in the game (hostility towards different raced people), why would tynan add transphobia?

And a botched surgery can happen to anyone, like people who want a bionically enhanced arm. Being beaten up for being trans is only related to trans people. So including that WILL trigger trans people, not botched surgeries.

Honestly, I'm not seeing why those reasons should be why trans people should be excluded from the game. We have neurotic, too smart, and prostophile that affect mood and break threshold and we've hadn't had issue with any of them. Transgender people just present a different kind of pawn that people have to deal with until escape. You can keep them joyed up to avoid their mood debuff or get them their "upgrade" in order to get a mood buff. Its not really big gameplay wise anyway regardless, its just more flavor and being more inclusive which is never bad IMO.

Carly with all due respect rimworld is a simulator,  and i think simulation of things to their realistic ways as much as pheasable is a good idea. Trans bullying exists in real life,  why exclude it from the game? As does racism,  both in extreme and subtle forms. Adding them isn't "supporting"  them,  but just adding it.  Tynan I'm sure doesn't support cannibalism or slavery,  yet he added those.

Just because someone is uncomfortable with something doesn't mean it shouldn't exist.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 11, 2016, 11:06:21 PM
Carly with all due respect rimworld is a simulator,  and i think simulation of things to their realistic ways as much as pheasable is a good idea.

I never said I wasn't uncomfortable with it, I just was agreeing that those who are trans may find it upsetting find to have the trans characters in game mistreated/bullied as they may have been in real life.

Edit: Derp, my IRL name is Carly so I initially thought that was directed at me lol.

As I mentioned in a couple other similar threads, I'm all for it being added as a mod, but I think the developers time and effort would be better spent working on new features for the game that's too complex for modders to add otherwise, and provide a more noticeable addition to the games complexity/fun factor. (like the new game + idea, or other complicated suggestions others have made that would require alteration to the source code and the level of coding finesse only the developers can manage.)

I'm gonna be completely honest here and say fuck no. You aren't the one to judge which games we are allowed to be in. Ideally, all games should be as inclusive as possible. I see no reason why trans+ people can't be in Rimworld. The world is harsh? Well newsflash buttercup, the world RIGHT NOW is extremely harsh to transpeople. We are seen as deviants and predators by most conservative people because of out identity. "Men in dresses/tomboys". They think we are just dressing up to go in and prey on children, a lie widely propagated by conservative media. Laws are regularly made against us to allow discrimination. You thought the one in NC is bad? There have bills pushed that'll make it so that people will be paid to point out transpeople in bathrooms that match their gender identity, basically bounty-hunting for transpeople. And even more twisted, vile and harsh? We are regularly murdered and driven to suicide. Our suicide attempt rates are the highest among minorities, above 40%. you know Mumble's comment on getting reject/beaten for finding out a person is trans. That happens IRL, and transpeople are murdered for it. You can google several news articles of transgender women being killed by someone they were dating. And people regularly say its their fault and victimblame, basically blaming us for getting ourselves murdered and not the murderer for murdering us.

People harrass, send threats, doxx us, abuse us (physically and sexually), and even murder us. And for what? What you might say? For having the gall to be open about our identity.

And this is the world, right now, for us.

So Rimworld is too harsh for us? Fuck that noise. The world right now is harsher than Rimworld can be for us and other minorities. And I rather Rimworld stay that way and not include those kinds of real life struggles trans+ people face right now. The struggles in Rimworld are about survival, not gender identity, gender, race, and orientation. They challenge the player to use the pawns and all the traits and quirks they have with them to survive, thrive, and escape. An old black woman with cataracts, a white teenage boy who is neurotic, and an asian man who is a great shooter but is afraid of fire. These characters from different background all fit in well into the survival story of Rimworld, and I can't see why a trans man who came from a mining colony and was too poor to transition can't fit into this ragtag group as well.

Wolf, I've felt a pain in my gut a few times in rimworld too, from breakups, family issues, ect. Its a game which is emotionally engaging, and sometimes a little bit painful to watch, but that is part of the "storytelling" experience.  Sure, seeing a girl break up with a guy after he saved her, got maimed in the process, because of a small argument, before an infection slowly killed him hit me right in the feels. It hurt, it hurt bad, it reminded me of a few break ups I had, and DAMN that hurt... BUT, I would never, EVER say "rim-world shouldn't have x because it hurts my feeling and made me a bit sad". Even though, embarrassing to say, that situation got me really, really effected emotionally, and hate to say it, brought a tear to my eye, I wouldn't say that shouldn't happen..

I think padding it so these heartache causing events don't happen is a bit of a dis-service to rim-world in general. The bad, and the good together are what make rimworld SO great, the times of low and desperation making times of prosperity and triumph all the more satisfying, and times of hopelessness and despair made more impactful by better times.

Oh and, I wouldn't mind them added IF social stigma, relationship issues, surgery failure, attacks on them by those who disapprove, and other stuff was added ALONG WITH trans folks, but I know you guys would never accept a colonist hating a trans colonist having a possibility to beat them up because they flirted with them. Its just silly to say to add trans people, but NO trans resistance / animosity. That is unrealistic, and doesn't fit the game.

And carly, seeing as you admit the world is harsh, would you be ok if all that was added alongside? Harassment, threats, abuse, murder, all that jazz? it is a simulator after all... Or are you saying you only want CERTAIN  aspects to make it the way you want, not representing reality? Even if you cannot see why people think certain ways (understandable as you aren't them, and are trans yourself as you admit right?) they still think it, and no amount of time in the future will ever fully destroy a way of thinking.

As for laws against trans, laws pro trans outnumber them vastly...just saying.

Quote from: Carlyscarlet on April 11, 2016, 11:26:31 PM
I'm gonna be completely honest here and say fuck no.

-snip

Ease down Carly, no need to blow a gasket and get the thread locked.  ;)

I think you managed to somehow miss my point so let me rephrase:

Games are meant to be fun, for many people they provide a nice escape from the boredom/pain/struggle every day life is. For those kinds of people they tend to enjoy not having reminders of the crap they go through in every day life when they sit down for a bit of escapism with a video game.

Granted you may not have that problem, but other trans people may very well find the inclusion of a trans character that is bulled/shunned/abused very upsetting because it mirrors events that happen to them in real life on a daily basis they'd just as soon not be reminded of while playing a video game.

That's the point I was supporting, that others besides you may be upset by it, and that is worth keeping that in mind when considering the inclusion of the trans minority in the vanilla game.

The other point I was trying to make is that in my opinion Rimworld isn't be best place for it compared to other games that would allow the trait to have more of a noteworthy story telling effect. So feel free to disagree with my onion, but there's no need to get so aggressive about it.

Quote from: StorymasterQ on April 11, 2016, 03:21:44 AM
You have a point there. If straight colonists don't have a 'straight' trait, that's really defining 'normal' isn't it?

Well, yes. That doesn't mean that gay people are evil deviants, but it does mean that they are a substantial minority.

I can understand the upset at losing a trait slot to it, though.

Quote from: Carlyscarlet on April 11, 2016, 11:26:31 PM
I'm gonna be completely honest here and say fuck no. You aren't the one to judge which games we are allowed to be in. Ideally, all games should be as inclusive as possible. I see no reason why trans+ people can't be in Rimworld. The world is harsh? Well newsflash buttercup, the world RIGHT NOW is extremely harsh to transpeople. We are seen as deviants and predators by most conservative people because of out identity. "Men in dresses/tomboys". They think we are just dressing up to go in and prey on children, a lie widely propagated by conservative media. Laws are regularly made against us to allow discrimination. You thought the one in NC is bad? There have bills pushed that'll make it so that people will be paid to point out transpeople in bathrooms that match their gender identity, basically bounty-hunting for transpeople. And even more twisted, vile and harsh? We are regularly murdered and driven to suicide. Our suicide attempt rates are the highest among minorities, above 40%. you know Mumble's comment on getting reject/beaten for finding out a person is trans. That happens IRL, and transpeople are murdered for it. You can google several news articles of transgender women being killed by someone they were dating. And people regularly say its their fault and victimblame, basically blaming us for getting ourselves murdered and not the murderer for murdering us.

People harrass, send threats, doxx us, abuse us (physically and sexually), and even murder us. And for what? What you might say? For having the gall to be open about our identity.

And this is the world, right now, for us.

So Rimworld is too harsh for us? Fuck that noise. The world right now is harsher than Rimworld can be for us and other minorities. And I rather Rimworld stay that way and not include those kinds of real life struggles trans+ people face right now. The struggles in Rimworld are about survival, not gender identity, gender, race, and orientation. They challenge the player to use the pawns and all the traits and quirks they have with them to survive, thrive, and escape. An old black woman with cataracts, a white teenage boy who is neurotic, and an asian man who is a great shooter but is afraid of fire. These characters from different background all fit in well into the survival story of Rimworld, and I can't see why a trans man who came from a mining colony and was too poor to transition can't fit into this ragtag group as well.

Killing Support for a Cause 101

Yeah wolf, those situations which make me almost cry are exceptionally rare, but enough that I'm well aware of them. Really am embarrassed to admit rimworld can do that to me but it can.

But trans people would be rather rare to begin with, so a bullied, much less murdered trans would be about equally as rare. So for the sake of equality, I say add them in alongside, because everyone loves everyone being treated evenly, right? That is equality yes?

Also carly, if you are speaking about in America, things are nowhere near as harsh as rimworld is. Rimworld has extreme isolation with little to no peer support. Rimworld has you fighting to survive, struggling just to feed yourself. Rimworld has frequent attacks which routinely maim people indiscriminately . Rimworld has diseases which can end up fatal if you don't have a doctor. Rimworld is much harsher than america, especially because an LGBT person in america has a MASSIVE support network, lawyers, legislation's, politicians, ect, all supporting them. On the rim? All you have to support you is yourself, your 2 hands, and your companions, and often theres little to no time to focus on ones self.  And usually if for whatever reason you cannot function, you are left to die, like dead weight. And unlike in America when you can speak out, call the press, get support from the lgbt or ACLU, on the rim you have absolutely no-one to defend you , unless you are lucky enough to make a few friends.

and yes, things should be viewed in the context of a colony with cramped living space, and people being unavoidable, as well as life being a resource... So yes, murder would be unlikely, and probably punished / prevented by player even if they were anti LGBT (survival before ethics I guess) But people who otherwise just keep distance from them would be forced to deal with someone they don't like, leading to tension.

also

Quote from: Lady Wolf on April 11, 2016, 11:16:37 PM
Edit: Derp, my IRL name is Carly so I initially thought that was directed at me lol.

I found this much funnier than I should have   :D

Jesus christ, so many things to reply to.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 11, 2016, 09:04:40 AM
Uhm... Sorry, heterosexual, and even gay and bisexual are much, MUCH  more reasonable than being into bestiality, or intersexuality,

That's a matter of opinion, for instance an old testament bible thumper would disagree with you on that, Its all relative to someones personal values and morals nothing more.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 11, 2016, 09:04:40 AM
considering the major health risks to both.

The health risks they also are a matter of opinion, for some people that major risk is only minor to them because they their desires make them change their risk evaluation.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 11, 2016, 09:04:40 AM
And in reality things can change, asexuals can become straight or gay, straight can become bi, ect. The whole "born that way" trope is utter bs.

Your claim that "born that way" is BS.

QuoteSeveral other studies indicate that sexual orientation — heterosexuality, bisexuality, and homosexuality — is determined by peculiarities of the brain structure and differences in brain chemistry. Cultural or societal factors, upbringing, moral leanings, and educational attainments do not determine sexual orientation as greatly as neural mechanisms do.

url]http://brainblogger.com/2015/05/14/homosexuality-in-the-brain/[/url]

QuoteGay men and heterosexual women had halves of a similar size, while the right side was bigger in lesbian women and heterosexual men.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7456588.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7456588.stm)

QuoteBrain scans have provided the most compelling evidence yet that being gay or straight is a biologically fixed trait.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14146-gay-brains-structured-like-those-of-the-opposite-sex/ (https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14146-gay-brains-structured-like-those-of-the-opposite-sex/)

QuoteIn some ways the brains of straight men and lesbians are on similar wavelengths, the research suggests. Likewise, gay men and straight women appear to have similar brains, in some respects. The findings are new evidence that homosexuals may be born with a predisposition to be gay.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/06/080616-gay-brain.html (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/06/080616-gay-brain.html)

So it would seem that your statement is the BS one, if the science is anything to go by.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 11, 2016, 09:04:40 AM
And honestly, the whole thing is assuming people would WANT to be tolerant, left to their own devices, in their own society, and to think nobody would have a problem, especially when social structure was just added is plain old silly. In-fact I'm surprised no pawns have dislike towards gay people, that isn't realistic. I mean, I've seen colonists kill each other over insults even when they were friends, whats to say the same might happen if another colonist made them uncomfortable with their "orientation", or insisting being called a different title all the sudden?

Tynan Has mentioned the idea of a potential beliefs system before.

Quote from: Tynan on March 17, 2015, 11:18:28 PM
I've wanted to do a beliefs system for ages, but I think I should do a "social relationships" system first if I'm gonna go down that path.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 11, 2016, 09:04:40 AM
also, if there were those into bestiality, would we occasionally run into chinchillas or cats / dogs with internal injuries from it? or an animal mauling someone over a "romance" attempt?

And that's somehow worse then the potential "hate crimes" that would occur if some pawn did dislike gays? Its seems to me that your opposition is based in personal distaste and that you use reason to justify its non inclusion.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 11, 2016, 11:54:32 AM
Sorry but i fail to see how even more lgbt elements could be an "interesting game mechanic", unless it was realistic which would surely be offensive to people.

I think it could be interesting, especially when combined with a beliefs system that enables such realism.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 11, 2016, 11:54:32 AM
As is,  gay trait is just "there"  and does nothing for gameplay ,  and others would provide nothing (asexual)  at best,  and be a downright negative trait at worst (transsexual,  zoophile).

That is also a matter of opinion, personally I'd see at least zoophile as a positive on account of the amusement it would provide me thanks to the fact colonist can have opinions of other it'd be funny to watch the reactions to the zoophile.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 11, 2016, 11:54:32 AM
I don't think its worth coding such obscure traits which will be annoying to deal with,  be bickered over 10 times as much as this,  and do jack for gameplay when we could instead work on something really interesting,  like doing our own raids.

you have no interest in these trait and I have no interest in conducting my own raids, as I've said before what its a matter of personal opinion and the only person who's opinion matter is Tynan's.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 11, 2016, 11:54:32 AM
If it wasn't for people insisting on "the full representation of sexuality",  this idea wouldn't be supported much.  Its suggested because people want inclusion,  nothing more. 

And that's a problem for you because?

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 11, 2016, 11:54:32 AM
And saying they "will exist"  is a silly exist.  I'm sure taking a piss will exist daily for colonists,  doesn't mean i think it should be programmed.  And if it did exist, i think it would be fleeting,  and shunned severely.

I personally would like there to be a "bladder" system like the Sims so....

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 11, 2016, 03:35:03 PM
The reason why I'm against it is because its unrealistic, and not just in a "this cannot realistically happen" way, but in an immersion breaking "why would this work in this universe" sort of way... everything has consequences in rimworld, and more extreme sexual traits would have much more extreme outcomes I would think. Someone turning transgender could end with a dramatic cost for mood from dysphoria / immense cost for hormones and surgery, and surgery could end up botched ending in even worse effects, or end up with a fatal infections. And surgery in real life with that is pretty nasty to begin with. Even if we assume we use more advanced methods, like a vat grown penis and testicles or vagina, the cost would be so much that most people would instead use it for replacing organs that were DAMAGED, not that... So it really comes down to, don't add it, add it but have laughable realism and have it be more "token" and "padded", or add it realistically, and get everyone mad.

These don't seem like a reasons to not add it to me, add it realistically and if people get mad that's on them and their sensitivities.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 11, 2016, 03:35:03 PM
And for zoophiles, I could see it being problematic with the farming aspect, if someone found out his animal he bonded with was "romanced",

The way I see it the one who's bonded is liable to to also be the one who doing the "romancing".

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 11, 2016, 03:35:03 PM
I could see a witch hunt happening to avenge the violated, and potentially injured animal.

There could be "witch hunts" for the zoophile's but how is that any different then having some people dislike gays like you suggested and them going on a witch hunt?

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 11, 2016, 03:35:03 PM
All these things I cannot see happening in a glamorous way, nor flattering, which would cause an outrage, so I figure it is best to not add it, to avoid even more arguments. Which there WOULD be, if added.

So you just want to avoid confrontation, that's not a good enough reason for me nor should it be for anyone imho.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 11, 2016, 03:35:03 PM
Though, hey, if all the sexual traits out there, including sadism was added, and prison was changed to punish / try to re-rehabilitate people, it could make for some dark, and crazy storytelling. Imagine an attempted, or even successful rapist, being flogged as punishment, risking death, but trying to make a spectacle out of it to enforce behavior. Would be even more interesting if you needed that colonist... But that would probably be a bit much for rimworld

Crime within my colony and a justice system to go along with it sounds great to me, +1 to this Idea.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 11, 2016, 03:35:03 PM
Problem is, cannibalism is fairly detached, rape and such carries more weight to it.... I've actually suggested rape in the past as a mental break, but yeah, people weren't comfortable.

Their not supposed to be comfortable with it, that's kind of the point of including it.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 11, 2016, 03:35:03 PM
which is why I'm suggesting we DON'T add more, or if we do, go all out and accept there will be fucked up stuff. Half assing deeper elements of sexuality is just stupid imo

Then I would suggest that you change from opposition to the support of fully realistic implementation.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 11, 2016, 03:35:03 PM
And yeah, there's been a few threads but active ones, before alpha 13 as well...I just don't want to head down that slippery slope.

Slippery slope is a logical fallacy and such arguments can and should be discarded.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 11, 2016, 04:52:39 PM
I mean transsexuality is "as bad",  in that murphys law which is pretty much a storyteller in rimworld, will ensure both cause immense problems with colonies. Imagine everything that can go wrong with those. 

I see this as reason to include it not exclude it.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 11, 2016, 04:52:39 PM
Now throw in a boomrat exploding from dying of internal bleeding while simultaneously setting a guys wang on fire ... Actually that would be absolutely hilarious.

This is something on which we agree  :)

Quote from: Lady Wolf on April 11, 2016, 09:07:34 PM
Such gritty details would also potentially impact sales, Cannibalism is far enough removed from civilized socities real life unpleasantness that it's not likely to traumatize or offend someone by being in the game,

This is the problem with modern society, can't do this, can't say that you might offend someone or hurt their precious feeling, I'd tell them what my brother told me, drink a cup of concrete and harden the fuck up.

Case in point my cousin was abused by her step father when she between 11-14  she's now in her early twenty and she tried to play that card with me and it didn't work, ten years is sufficient time to deal with it and harden up.

Quote from: Lady Wolf on April 11, 2016, 09:07:34 PM
adding something like rape from a colonist having a mental break could/would likely upset quite a few people, and it would also likely cause all sorts of bad publicity for the game.

No such thing as bad publicity and free publicity is the best kind.

Quote from: Lady Wolf on April 11, 2016, 09:07:34 PM
(Similar to how Mass Effects same sex romance plot with Lira Tsoni got it (mis) labeled a "lesbian sex simulator" by the media.)

And that hurt Mass Effects sale so much.  ???

Quote from: Lady Wolf on April 11, 2016, 09:07:34 PM
Zoophile/Trans/asexual/robot lover/etc I don't see adding enough additional depth to the relationship aspect of the game to be worth the time for Tynan to code in given there's so many other neat stuff he could add. (like being able to land on a new planet with your built ship & stored resources for example/)

You want to have a new game + but I don't want that, what I do want is a massively in-depth personality system for pawns and sexuality of all kinds plays into that.

Quote from: Lady Wolf on April 11, 2016, 09:07:34 PM
And like I said in another similar thread, there will no doubt be mods to add in zoophila/trans/planto-philes and whatever other sexual orientation/interest people think is needed; and probably a mod to remove the gay/lesbian/bi traits entirely for those who just want a straight colony.

Saying "it can be modded in" is not a good or valid argument in my opinion.

Quote from: Carlyscarlet on April 11, 2016, 10:11:25 PM
As a transgender woman, I would requrest you to refrain from adding trans with the likes zoophilia. Zoophilia is a paraphilia, not a sexual orientation, and is highly frowned upon.

I'm sure that people who identify as zoosexual would disagree with that, the question is if you can discount these peoples opinions of themselves and that ok is it not also ok for other to disagree with your opinion about intersexuality?

While this does come close to being a slippery slope fallacy it is relevant when a group of people that want to be accepted "discriminate" against another group that also want to be accepted.

As for it being frowned upon, it is legal in multiple states of America to have sex with farm animals so...

Quote from: Carlyscarlet on April 11, 2016, 10:11:25 PM
Zoophilia is beastiality and beastiality is always rape because animals are incapable of consenting.

Something Zoosexuals would disagree with and that I actually agree with them on, ever had a dog hump your like with its "red rocket" out? because that make a damn good case for consent and once you accept the principal that consent is possible the entire subject must be considered fairly.

Quote from: Carlyscarlet on April 11, 2016, 10:11:25 PM
On the other hand, transgender is an identity where a persons gender identity doesn't match their biological sex. They are in no way related and  its quite frankly insulting to see them next to each other in the same sentence. I'm not saying you intended to insult, but as a trans person it came off that way.

Some people see trangender as a mental illness and nothing more, if you discount Zoosexuals because of personal distaste then you are engaging in the same mentality of those whom would "fix" the mind of transgenders and homosexuals, if you want to be treated equally then first you must be willing to give it to others.

Quote from: Carlyscarlet on April 11, 2016, 10:11:25 PM
I don't know about this ever being implemented in vanilla. It would be super sweet if it was. More representation of minorities is great, especially mine. It takes some more dev time, but I feel like it would be worth it. Definitely would recommend this game more to my trans buddies if trans people were included in vanilla.

I always find it funny when a group sees themselves as a minority to be accepted but not that other group, their just freaks.  ::)

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 11, 2016, 10:36:21 PM
The reason I compare the 2 is they both present very real risks and problems to the colony.  Not the same risks but risks

That's not a good reason for exclusion imho.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 11, 2016, 10:36:21 PM
Zoophiles / bestiality (whichever one is an urge for sex with animals) would be risky for hurting / possibly killing animals, mood issues, fights / killing over an assaulted animal, ect, if not the animal violently rejecting the attempt

The interview with zoosexuals I've read seemed to imply that they where in love with their animal and would not hurt them, zoophilia is the fetish zoosexual is the orientation, at least that's how they see it.

I would have my hetrosexual pawns commit infidelity and for the spouse that was cheated on to kill their cheating spouse, after all it make for a good story and what you've said here doesn't seem that different to me.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 11, 2016, 10:36:21 PM
Transexuals would have a mood debuff, a "need" for hormones, "need" for surgery, which would be a huge financial hardship on the colony. Add onto that health risks, botched surgery risk, infection, social hardship (even if indistinguishable, there are men who can, and will reject even the most passable transsexual woman on the basis of them being transsexual and not a born girl, and getting a truly passable downstairs bit is incredibly difficult, maybe impossible with current techniques) instability emotionally during transition (its called the second puberty after all) and other issues I'm probably forgetting.

All of which sounds like a ways to add more challenges to a colony and for some interesting stories.

Quote from: Carlyscarlet on April 11, 2016, 11:26:31 PM
I'm gonna be completely honest here and say fuck no. You aren't the one to judge which games we are allowed to be in.

If he was/os a game dev then he is, at least in game he dev's.

Quote from: Carlyscarlet on April 11, 2016, 11:26:31 PM
And I rather Rimworld stay that way and not include those kinds of real life struggles trans+ people face right now.

You wouldn't but I would, its relative, and yes I know I'm an inconsiderate asshole

Quote from: Carlyscarlet on April 11, 2016, 11:26:31 PM
The struggles in Rimworld are about survival, not gender identity, gender, race, and orientation. They challenge the player to use the pawns and all the traits and quirks they have with them to survive, thrive, and escape.

Part of surviving in any group is ensuring that people actually work together rather then tearing themselves, this is why I want social issues and a justice/law system to be included.

Quote from: Carlyscarlet on April 11, 2016, 11:26:31 PM
An old black woman with cataracts, a white teenage boy who is neurotic, and an asian man who is a great shooter but is afraid of fire. These characters from different background all fit in well into the survival story of Rimworld, and I can't see why a trans man who came from a mining colony and was too poor to transition can't fit into this ragtag group as well.

I can, one of them is an old testament bible thumper who views the trans as sinful regardless of evidence or other concerns.



Well that took forever... I don't think I'll do so much at once again, I ended up going on a tangent.

Oh boy, great.....

Directed at jester (cannot be arsed to quote EVERYTHING) and I also wrote as I read, so bare with it.

You could maybe make the argument for gay, les, but viewing as the purpose of sexuality by evolution is procreation, these things are a bit abnormal. Not saying these are evil, But they are, and you insisting that its not is trying to insist that everything is normal. As for trans, that is desiring self mutilation which in itself is DEEPLY abnormal, so under standard evolutionary points, these are not normal, the fact they are an extreme minority also displays this.

The idea of someone being born that way is bs. There is absolutely no proof of a "gay" gene, and sexuality has been proven countless times to be flexible through events. A girl who is raped and abused can become lesbian due to her strong distrust towards males afterwards, to the point the normal sex drive and attraction to males simply cannot function well, and she will vent affection and need for touch on a suitable replacement, because trying to do so with males can cause panic reminding her of the rape.

I honestly think that whole brain scan stuff is bullshit. Chicken or the egg argument, brain scans can change from someone putting tits in a straight mans face because he gets aroused and that shows. Brain scans are not "this is how their brain was born", not remotely, they represent a snapshot of how people are thinking. Culture, society, upbringing, and what they are experiencing in that moment DO determine neural mechanisms, as do drug intakes.

See above post

See above post

See abo- actually yeah, since lesbians are sexually attracted to women, and butch ones act more men like, this makes sense. But still, doesn't mean they were born that way, just that the patterns of "attacted to x, acting like y" are similar"

Good, hope tynan adds faiths.

Depends what you view as hate crimes, and the results of both. If a guy gets socially beat up and recovers, compared to a dog dying and a colonist losing shit and killing the person who did it? yeah, I think its worse. Also depends on the value of the colonist of course. Its really hard to say since everything in rimworld is situational as fuck.

You said it would be interesting, with beleifs, yet aren't you saying LGBT people in game shouldn't be discriminated against?  That wouldn't be remotely fair or realistic to say, include christianity, or islam and expect gay or ESPECIALLY trans people to be accepted, you know this right? especially in the middle east, trans people are targeted and abused. Plus, as I've said before, I have no problem them being added IF, all the hardships of abuse, being shunned socially, getting attacked, discrimination, and all that was included.

I was talking on a basis STRICTLY of benefit to the colony stability, NOT "amusement". You can't tell me a transexual who gets on some peoples nerves, spends hundreds of  silver a month on hormones, and wants surgery would be more useful than a normal guy with same stats across the board, right? No,  because one is demanding a bunch of things, one isn't.

K, yeah, I agree Tynan gets the last say, but I also say wanting raids on other places is more popular a want than LGBT stuff. Even if you disagree, its still the popular opinion those who REALLY want more LGBT stuff seem to be an extremely vocal minority.

My problem is wasting time coding JUST because an obscure person wants to be "included".  It would provide very little to GAMEPLAY (read: not emergent story, those can be interpreted a million different ways, and you could argue someone dying from plague and dying from malaria are different stories) to the mix, and just add more negative (read : difficult to manage) traits to the mix, all because a vocal minority is demanding it. Its simply not worth the coding for an obscure case, just as I suggested ty keep animals from eating dead masters, he told me that "small, obscure hyper specific AI generally isn't a necessary when its only seen in an extremely small amount of cases". Programming in monthly hormone injections, super complex social transformations, ect, stigma, would take a long time, for a person we might never really get a chance to see.

Thats nice, still doubt a bladder system will be needed, especially considering theres no water system yet. Plus bladder system means more micromanagement for no reason, which ty doesn't take lightly.

Cool, I can finally agree....If added this way, and an LGBT colonist gets killed at some point, or frequently abused, or just socially shunned / disowned by parents, don't come back complaining.

Are you suggesting zoophiles inheriently would have high animal stats? What if they don't have a bonded animal? Would they agree to never persue tail because "they aren't mine"? These questions need to be answered. And I think having an animal always cool with it / having it only be if tames is a little optimistic. Certainly if there's was a whole farms worth, temptation would be there.

Difference is one would be, in that moment, responsible for assault. I guess this could apply to gays as well if gay people had a slim chance to try to force straight people if there were no other gays, but this would quickly end with a firing squad. Yeah, that would be dark, but it happens in real life.

Again, I'm fine them being added IF they were added with all the risks / problems that they really have (depression, anger, social problems, shunned by family, expensive hormone treatment, possibility of being warped / killed / infected by surgery, depression / suicide risk AFTER surgery ect) but I know if that stuff would be added, rimworld WOULD be taking fire for it. So no, its not worth it. Would be a kick ass mod though, and modders are more politically immune than actually developers.

Agreed, justice system would be great, especially if "frontier" justice, not always done by any "book", but judged by the community.

Agreed, but, adding such stuff WOULD make rimworld a bit less popular because some people would reject the game on the basis of people could be raped.

Slippery slope is not always a fallacy, if there is proof of trends reasons to believe, and risk of provoking a chain reaction, its reasonable. IE if you kill a prisoner in the city who people are spouting that its "racist", and are threatening to riot, you might have a riot, followed by racial tensions. This isn't a fallacy, this is a prediction of events, not always can it be "proven" but its a prediction. You can question the validity of the prediction, but that doesn't mean its instantly discarded, as my prediction for THESE threads, so far, have been spot on.

As I said, if YOU are ok with trans abuse, exclusion, excommunication, fights, ect ect, cool, but again, its risky to rim-world to add it as other people WILL FLIP, like carly (not you lady wolf =P), I'm sure if they were added, she would be extremely upset, possibly campaign against the game. Again, this is only a prediction, but she has said as much already.

Hahah, yes, an artwork piece on it would be even better...imagine the thread which draws art, drawing that...my god.

While I agree, society should harden, I'm not a fool in thinking just because some ( a lot) of people are way too sensitive about hurt feelings , I know they also might still try to muck stuff up because of it. Question is, do we want rimworld to be an awesome game, or a possible martyr for anti censorship? This said, for your cousin, its not "just" time, but mental processes to go through to fix the damage, and this isn't always dealt with in x amount of time. A person in great mental health can overcome rape in a day, while a person can be damaged for years.

Actually, good point, and rimworld is a niche game....maybe we should let tumbler get outraged over stuff? But hey, tynans choice not mine.

Mass effect was massively over-rated IMO.

This is an issue with rimworld, we all have ideas of what rimworld "should be" some think it should be a survival sims, some think it should be a more personally deep command and conquer, some think it should be a base builder primarily....and none of us are right or wrong, tynan at the end of the day is the owner, and chooses how the game evolves.

I think modding argument is good IF the things added are obscure, add little to gameplay, and adding deeper framework to the maingame would be more beneficial. Think of it this way, if raids and location visiting was added, we could have bars / strip clubs we could potentially travel to, because the framework would be there for mods.

Hah, drama between certain eccentric people disliking other eccentric people. Funny stuff. The fact carly gets offended instead of realizing the similarities says a lot. And again, slippery slope is hugely mis-interpeted. If Carly is going to reject zoophiles, while demanding inclusion, it IS fair for zoophiles, and others to reject her for being trans. Equality means getting same opportunities, same punishments, same bullshit, and same chance at being judged for who you are. Saying we can call zoophiles "stinking dog assaulters" or something silly, but at the same time demanding nobody even bring up people being trans in a negative light is incredibly unequal. For the record, not calling any zoophiles that, just making a point.

I also agree zoophilia isn't always rape. Especially if a male dog mounts, that is all the dogs choice. Granted its hard to tell without verbal communication, but consent does not boil down to "if they said yes" but, "was the other person ok with it". I had sex countless times with my ex where we just jumped in the sack and had at it without a word, this wasn't rape because she obviously was ok with it. And actually, sex without verbal communication is far more enjoyable imo =) spontaneous is awesome.

Agreed, equality across the board of inclusion AND ability to be criticized is important. And yes, many, MANY people including those who have felt gender dysphoria (myself) view it as a mental illness, which people prevent even the bare minimum of discussion from happening. So even if people want to examine it, point out correlations to abuse, theories supported by evidence showing their case, they are often persecuted for even saying it.

Ditto.... This is why I view all sexual things as having a causation, and look at it as the merits of harm done, benefits, risks, and the whys / hows involved. For the record I find zoophilia more tolerable than transexuality, simply because I know the mental health mess behind it, mass suicide often done by post op transexuals, ect. But zoophilia people seem on average quite more stable.

Yeah, I guess it not a good risk for exclusion, but again, people being offended / throwing a fit... Plus really representing them in all the depth would be sooooooooooooooo much work.

I agree, and speaking to someone else on here who was a zoophile recently definitely was enlightening and they seem like a cool person, BUT, negative people in the same orientation also exist. There are straight people who are caring lovers, and straight people who are fucked up abusive people. There are gay people who lead good lives, and gay people who are "bug chasers" or have a thing for getting with straight guys by whatever means are available, including date rape... there are zoophiles who care for animals, and those that are torturous to them...I think we should represent the full spectrum, perhaps with  the sadism trait.

Again, I agree, but would provoke people... Already covered several times in this post, its a risk, a dice roll if its worth it.

Yep, tynan gets the final say, no matter what any of us think or do.

Lol. But yes I agree, if I can be brought to tears because a man gets dumped after having body parts blown off because hes now disfigured before dying of infection because it emotionally hurt me, why should other people have their emotions guarded? If you are that scared of emotional pain, don't play the game.

yep, people already fight over being drug addicts / purists, lazy / hardworking, so I don't see why trans people shouldn't have the same for normal people

I would say one could also be non religious and disagree with the reason, calling it a mental illness, but the point is the same, yes, personalities and thoughts will clash, even more so if people refuse to listen to opinions of others, which those in that type of person rarely seem to do... My guess is because of cognitive dissonance, which seems very profound with them.

yep, very long post and response, but I love the community all the more for it. Even though I disagree with jester on some bits, I love the fact we can have an argument and not wage war from it =)

As for you pickle, its difficult because the umbrella term transsexual covers sooooooooooooo much. It covers hermaphrodites, inferiority complex situations causing those to have issues with their gender, hormonal imbalances, chemical issues, ect ect... But again, medical field refuses to look into the "whys" of these, and questioning into it is sometimes even met with violence, so yeah. I would be interested to know if you, perhaps, you were born with "internal" female (or male) parts which what caused it, this happens occasionally, I've heard cases of outwardly boys almost dying because menstruation internally had nowhere to vent out, causing toxin build up. But if you had that, it would make you feel different than one with an inferiority complex.

I think I may have just gotten stupider for having read that.

Quote from: Torkkar on April 12, 2016, 07:18:05 PMthe LGTG community wants equality give up the Gay Pride Parade we don't get the straight pride parade why should you get a parade for your sexuality when we don't?

Because there really isn't a thing such as Straight bashing?

Quote from: Mikhail Reign on April 13, 2016, 04:08:21 AM

Quote from: Torkkar on April 12, 2016, 07:18:05 PMthe LGTG community wants equality give up the Gay Pride Parade we don't get the straight pride parade why should you get a parade for your sexuality when we don't?

Because there really isn't a thing such as Straight bashing?

Around militant, man-hatting lesbians there is... Or gays for that matter.

And point is, equality shouldn't be "gays shouldn't ever be disadvantaged", but "gay people should have the equal opportunity to succeed AND fuck up as a straight person". And there is a valid point in the pride parade thing : Its not fair to have a gay parade, but ban a straight parade, nor have gay bars, and ban straight bars.

Things shouln't try to "compensate" on perceived issues, this in itself causes many problems. Saying x party gets a free handout / advantage because they are "disadvantaged" causes a lot of bureaucracy and problems, Instead, let all parties get an EQUAL shot. Don't let "Disadvantaged" folks get a unique advantage on others unless its something very clear cut, like those in poverty or disability accommodation for. Something like giving women or minorities jobs they cannot do, paid the same amount as a guy who can, or giving a minority special treatment because they come from a "disadvantaged" background are very bad for society, as they cause more problems than they fix. The girl in the job raises costs substantially for the business in question by needing to get other workers around JUST to do the things she cannot, and giving special treatment generally means there will be far more who take advantage of it because they can, not necessarily because they need it.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 13, 2016, 04:14:00 AM

Quote from: Mikhail Reign on April 13, 2016, 04:08:21 AM

Quote from: Torkkar on April 12, 2016, 07:18:05 PMthe LGTG community wants equality give up the Gay Pride Parade we don't get the straight pride parade why should you get a parade for your sexuality when we don't?

Because there really isn't a thing such as Straight bashing?

Around militant, man-hatting lesbians there is... Or gays for that matter.

And point is, equality shouldn't be "gays shouldn't ever be disadvantaged", but "gay people should have the equal opportunity to succeed AND fuck up as a straight person". And there is a valid point in the pride parade thing : Its not fair to have a gay parade, but ban a straight parade, nor have gay bars, and ban straight bars.

Well a quick google on straight bashing brought up 5 news articles for straight people attacked and killed for being straight. Doing the same for gay people depressed the fuck out of me after the 12th page. Given that they represent about 4% of the population you can see that it is skewed. As for the bar thing, they represent 4% of the population, so yeah they probably need places specifically for them so that they can even find each other for socialization. Every other bar is a straight bar. No body cares that their are Goth clubs and saying 'oh why are there mainstream clubs' because they are able to grasp the fact that every other club is a mainstream club.

Jesus dude... I'm not even going to respond to you anymore. Every post of yours just seems like a troll.....

Straight bashing goes a bit deeper than just beatings, no place, bushiness, or other entity can really call themselves "exclusively straight" without risking absolute hell from LGBT activists. This limits many, many peoples rights. Lets say customers want a place without outwardly gay / trans people... that simply CANNOT legally exist now, and must find a way to allow them in even if a service is specifically catered to straight men and women. Look at the whole wedding cake sitution. Keep in mind, with capitalism, there will ALWAYS be people out there willing to make a buck. Yet gay people often times go out of their way to find straight, orthodox bakeries and force them to either make a cake, or have the business bombarded with potentially business ruining fines. Keep in mind, THIS IS NOT because they cannot find another place, believe me, this is NOT the reason, it is because they want to hurt a business that dares not include them. This essentially gives the message "Abandon your beliefs or die of poverty", which is borderline economic terrorism, especially because several bakeries would even have worked with them to point them to a bakery that doesn't care. Its not "suppressing" them to not want business with them, but it IS suppressing the business owners for personal choice, as you completely force the buisness, or punish them severely, not so for those wishing to buy a cake.

Ontop of that, media really does not cover "select" issues, so issues of violence, threats, coercion, ect, so of course it seems MUCH lower than it really is. There are cases out there, more than 4 where abuses have happened. This isn't just hate crimes, but crimes in general which aren't covered heavily despite the nature sometimes depending on offenders backgrounds.

One recent case was in texas another bakery situation, but where the family was harassed with threats ranging from burning their house down, to raping their son with a broken beer bottle....so yeah, definitely exists. Not to mention how strangely, gay people are more accepted / get more benefits on colleges than straight people...yeah.

not to mention tons of forums, businesses, web sights, nearly all govt operations will penalize you for even remotely speaking against anyone LGBT, which is censorship in itself, forcing people with different opinions into silence, or punishing them with fines, bans, lack of service, or other injuries for even so much as a criticism.

But if you aren't going to respond anymore, fine by me  :) you obviously don't have the patience, nor willpower for a lengthy debate, which is fine.

Saying we want OUR business to be the way we like does not mean we are douche-bags, that is a personal attack. People can, and do, choose not to buy from businesses because of it. And again, you completely ignore the fact that the effects are massively disproportionate. A gay couple denied a cake has to find another bakery. A straight business owner denied his right to express his faith has to either have the faith silenced, or have his business driven into the ground, by fines, and quite possibly arson attacks. If you really think that is remotely fair, think of it this way : Imagine a gay graphics artist or whatever was commissioned to do work of (non violent) antigay promotional material. If he denied it on the grounds of it is against his beliefs, now imagine that he now would get his business shut down, and possibly attacked just on that basis. Keep in mind, this is the EXACT same situation, but roles reversed, the gay man is rejecting work for beliefs when there SURELY are alternatives around, yet he would be persecuted for not supporting them. Though, considering your tone, and insulting me and others, as well as a pointless passive aggressive tone which adds nil to the argument with your ENTIRE response, its pretty clear you aren't debating anymore, and don't have valid points, you are just hoping to jab at people / instigate them into making this thread a madhouse so it gets locked. I will not have part in that, I will remain civil, refrain from insults, and keep it to debating my point. I recommend all others reading this who even remotely share any of my positions, as well as those that disagree with every single one, to do the same.

Also, you have no proof that I am white, christian, or other things, so that shows your thought process being flawed.. I'm actually agnostic with ideals taken from Christianity, Bhuddism, Taoist and others, I form my views from looking closely at things, and seeing which is right feeling, and logically sound. I'm not against transgenders because "god told me to be", I'm against it because I see the suffering it causes, and WHAT causes it, same thing for gays. Understanding the "whys" in life is a big part of my ideals, and if a why is not stated / is not logical, or has flaws, I'm critical of it, including myself. And focusing on my race, when it has nothing to do with the topic, and has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with this entire conversation, as your post equates to "poor you douchebag *sarcasm*" but with more words, so it only makes you look bad, impolite, snarky, and rude, while also being childishly presumptuous. Ask what I am before you speak on what you THINK I am, don't assume. I could assume a lot of things about you for being gay (or even that you are gay...), but I will not, I will let you answer for yourself when I ask before I make an assumption to pass judgement on. Also, not everyone against homosexuality / transexualism is white (my black pastor is very much against it) male (more women are against it often especially because a boyfriend having been gay makes infection of themselves much more likely than a straight guy statistically speaking) or christian (Muslims routinely hang gay folks in the middle east among other things, I'm just trying to convince people the problems of it)

As for locking this thread, no...I hope if your tactic of trying to lock this thread by causing a fight only gets you disciplined, because I personally am not rising to that childish kind of game and ruining the amazing dialog had in this thread. If you want to insult me, use jokes, provoke, and generally provide absolutely nothing into the thread like your last post, trying to cause drama (despite saying you want to prevent it?) Then go ahead. I won't rise to it, as its not even an argument, its not a debate on your point, not a counterpoint, refutation, new evidence, alerting me of a flaw, or anything, its childish poking and teasing, nothing more. Be childish all you want, I won't budge an inch from it, if you want to convince me like an adult go ahead. But passive aggressiveness and childish mocking will get you nowhere.

Try having a conversation like an adult, rejecting things on merits, pros, cons, risks and fully examining possibilities, and refraining from insults / attacks, I will take you more seriously. I disagree with zoophilia, to a certain extent, but admittedly a bit less because someone on this forum had quite a pleasant, civil PM discussion about it, where most gay / trans people in the past very quickly devolved into stuff along the lines of "fuck you bigot, go die in a fire", and I say that getting that line, or its equivalent more times than I can count for so much as voicing criticism on either a forum, or in person. If you want me to view you and your cause better, civility is the FIRST step to doing so.

Play nice, kids, or we'll take away your sand box. ;)

Look guys, this is a highly personal & emotionally charged issue. There's been both flirting with the line (please step away from the line) and good discussion (let's continue that). I expect everyone to continue to be level headed and non-inflammatory. If you're upset by something, take 5 before posting a reply. Don't feed the trolls, and don't encourage us to use Mjolnir.

Other than that, keep calm and carry on. :)

"Make sure you acknowledge my tiny minority in your game design or else ill throw a tantrum!" ffs people

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 12, 2016, 03:42:36 PM
Directed at jester (cannot be arsed to quote EVERYTHING) and I also wrote as I read, so bare with it.

I don't blame you for not quoting and I did the same just across multiple posts, ended up with a bit of dissonance on my part because of it.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 12, 2016, 03:42:36 PM
You could maybe make the argument for gay, les, but viewing as the purpose of sexuality by evolution is procreation, these things are a bit abnormal. Not saying these are evil, But they are, and you insisting that its not is trying to insist that everything is normal. As for trans, that is desiring self mutilation which in itself is DEEPLY abnormal, so under standard evolutionary points, these are not normal, the fact they are an extreme minority also displays this.

I agree, it is abnormal from a statistical point of view and would not argue otherwise but from the perspective of those effected by this abnormality it is normal.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 12, 2016, 03:42:36 PM
The idea of someone being born that way is bs. There is absolutely no proof of a "gay" gene, and sexuality has been proven countless times to be flexible through events. A girl who is raped and abused can become lesbian due to her strong distrust towards males afterwards, to the point the normal sex drive and attraction to males simply cannot function well, and she will vent affection and need for touch on a suitable replacement, because trying to do so with males can cause panic reminding her of the rape.

That just sound like PTSD to me and not an actual change to their base sexuality, they can no longer tolerate the touch of the gender their sexuality wants but have to direct the base human need for affection some where and thus the "change", its nothing more then a coping mechanism.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 12, 2016, 03:42:36 PM
I honestly think that whole brain scan stuff is bullshit. Chicken or the egg argument, brain scans can change from someone putting tits in a straight mans face because he gets aroused and that shows. Brain scans are not "this is how their brain was born", not remotely, they represent a snapshot of how people are thinking. Culture, society, upbringing, and what they are experiencing in that moment DO determine neural mechanisms, as do drug intakes.

Lots of things do change brain activity but the brain scan info isn't about brain activity but the physiological "build" of it.

QuoteA group of 90 healthy gay and heterosexual adults, men and women, were scanned by the Karolinska Institute scientists to measure the volume of both sides, or hemispheres, of their brain.

When these results were collected, it was found that lesbians and heterosexual men shared a particular "asymmetry" in their hemisphere size, while heterosexual women and gay men had no difference between the size of the different halves of their brain.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7456588.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7456588.stm)

QuoteTo get round this, Savic and her colleague, Per Lindström, chose to measure brain parameters likely to have been fixed at birth.

"That was the whole point of the study, to show parameters that differ, but which couldn't be altered by learning or cognitive processes," says Savic.

First they used MRI scans to find out the overall volume and shapes of brains in a group of 90 volunteers consisting of 25 heterosexuals and 20 homosexuals of each gender.

The results showed that straight men had asymmetric brains, with the right hemisphere slightly larger – and the gay women also had this asymmetry. Gay men, meanwhile, had symmetrical brains like those of straight women.

The team next used PET scans to measure blood flow to the amygdala, part of the brain that governs fear and aggression. The images revealed how the amygdala connected to other parts of the brain, giving clues to how this might influence behaviour.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14146-gay-brains-structured-like-those-of-the-opposite-sex/ (https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14146-gay-brains-structured-like-those-of-the-opposite-sex/)

QuotePast studies have shown that brain activity linked to sexual behavior differs between homosexuals and heterosexuals. But this study is the first to show that the cerebral networks themselves are also different, Savic said.

Fight or Flight?

Differences both in the brain activity and anatomy were observed in a study involving 90 men and women, including homosexuals and heterosexuals of both genders.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/06/080616-gay-brain.html (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/06/080616-gay-brain.html)

I know it all the same in but its from different sources, as I understand it these finding have yet to be refuted.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 12, 2016, 03:42:36 PM
Good, hope tynan adds faiths.

A beliefs system should be about more then just religious faith.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 12, 2016, 03:42:36 PM
Depends what you view as hate crimes, and the results of both. If a guy gets socially beat up and recovers, compared to a dog dying and a colonist losing shit and killing the person who did it? yeah, I think its worse. Also depends on the value of the colonist of course. Its really hard to say since everything in rimworld is situational as fuck.

The gay guy could also quite easily get beaten to death and the zoo could just beat the dogs killer to near death, like you said its situational and people are gonna be upset when a valuable pawn die regardless of why so adding more potential "why's" adds flavor in my mind.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 12, 2016, 03:42:36 PM
You said it would be interesting, with beleifs, yet aren't you saying LGBT people in game shouldn't be discriminated against?  That wouldn't be remotely fair or realistic to say, include christianity, or islam and expect gay or ESPECIALLY trans people to be accepted, you know this right? especially in the middle east, trans people are targeted and abused. Plus, as I've said before, I have no problem them being added IF, all the hardships of abuse, being shunned socially, getting attacked, discrimination, and all that was included.

I just like playing devils advocate, I don't personally care if anything we discuss here get added or not and I'm actually apathetic to the LGBT cause, I just felt like playing on this side of the fence this time.  :P

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 12, 2016, 03:42:36 PM
I was talking on a basis STRICTLY of benefit to the colony stability, NOT "amusement". You can't tell me a transexual who gets on some peoples nerves, spends hundreds of  silver a month on hormones, and wants surgery would be more useful than a normal guy with same stats across the board, right? No,  because one is demanding a bunch of things, one isn't.

Jealous pawns already make demands of sorts and adding more negative traits can result in players having to deal with more internal politic/social issues and that's a big part of running any society, even one that is comprised of drifters, vagabonds and castaways on a Rimworld in the ass end of space.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 12, 2016, 03:42:36 PM
K, yeah, I agree Tynan gets the last say, but I also say wanting raids on other places is more popular a want than LGBT stuff. Even if you disagree, its still the popular opinion those who REALLY want more LGBT stuff seem to be an extremely vocal minority.

I don't disagree with this at all but if people are going to bring what they do or don't want into the discussion it's only fair that I reply in kind.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 12, 2016, 03:42:36 PM
My problem is wasting time coding JUST because an obscure person wants to be "included".  It would provide very little to GAMEPLAY (read: not emergent story, those can be interpreted a million different ways, and you could argue someone dying from plague and dying from malaria are different stories) to the mix, and just add more negative (read : difficult to manage) traits to the mix, all because a vocal minority is demanding it. Its simply not worth the coding for an obscure case, just as I suggested ty keep animals from eating dead masters, he told me that "small, obscure hyper specific AI generally isn't a necessary when its only seen in an extremely small amount of cases". Programming in monthly hormone injections, super complex social transformations, ect, stigma, would take a long time, for a person we might never really get a chance to see.

I agree that if it is added on its own then it would be a waste of time and effort on Tynan's part that would not add anything to gameplay BUT I'm not thinking about it as a solitary addition but rather as a part of a potential beliefs and justice system, once a belief and justice systems are added to the mix it does start to provide gameplay opportunities.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 12, 2016, 03:42:36 PM
Thats nice, still doubt a bladder system will be needed, especially considering theres no water system yet. Plus bladder system means more micromanagement for no reason, which ty doesn't take lightly.

I doubt it will be added as well but I don't think it means more micromanagement, much like eating I imagine it would be handled by the AI with player mearly needing to add a little more infastuctuer, also adding a "bladder" need give the basis for adding fertilizers for crops.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 12, 2016, 03:42:36 PM
Cool, I can finally agree....If added this way, and an LGBT colonist gets killed at some point, or frequently abused, or just socially shunned / disowned by parents, don't come back complaining.

I wont complain, others will though.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 12, 2016, 03:42:36 PM
Are you suggesting zoophiles inheriently would have high animal stats? What if they don't have a bonded animal? Would they agree to never persue tail because "they aren't mine"? These questions need to be answered. And I think having an animal always cool with it / having it only be if tames is a little optimistic. Certainly if there's was a whole farms worth, temptation would be there.

Not so much as a high animal stat as a "passion" for animals.   ;)

As for animals that aren't theirs is something that the zoo community seems to argues amongst themselves about, fence hopper is the term they use for those that jump fences to have a "go" with the farm animals of others and admittedly many are for it but also many against it.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 12, 2016, 03:42:36 PM
Difference is one would be, in that moment, responsible for assault. I guess this could apply to gays as well if gay people had a slim chance to try to force straight people if there were no other gays, but this would quickly end with a firing squad. Yeah, that would be dark, but it happens in real life.

My point was that disliking them is what leads to hate crimes eg assaults and even without rape gays can be the subject of a witchhunt.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 12, 2016, 03:42:36 PM
Again, I'm fine them being added IF they were added with all the risks / problems that they really have (depression, anger, social problems, shunned by family, expensive hormone treatment, possibility of being warped / killed / infected by surgery, depression / suicide risk AFTER surgery ect) but I know if that stuff would be added, rimworld WOULD be taking fire for it. So no, its not worth it. Would be a kick ass mod though, and modders are more politically immune than actually developers.

Public relations is a subject I'm liable to always fail, being as I don't really care what others think of me and I do think its more likely as a mod then in vanilla, I'm merely voicing that personally I would add it and let the hater hate.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 12, 2016, 03:42:36 PM
Agreed, justice system would be great, especially if "frontier" justice, not always done by any "book", but judged by the community.

If you add a beliefs system as well then each pawns opinion of each type of justice can be factored in to their opinions on the type of justice that the player dishes out.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 12, 2016, 03:42:36 PM
Agreed, but, adding such stuff WOULD make rimworld a bit less popular because some people would reject the game on the basis of people could be raped.

I wont disagree and its not like either of us want the kind of people who would be attracted because of the addition of rape in the community, so I'm not surprised Tynan doesn't add it.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 12, 2016, 03:42:36 PM
Slippery slope is not always a fallacy, if there is proof of trends reasons to believe, and risk of provoking a chain reaction, its reasonable. IE if you kill a prisoner in the city who people are spouting that its "racist", and are threatening to riot, you might have a riot, followed by racial tensions. This isn't a fallacy, this is a prediction of events, not always can it be "proven" but its a prediction. You can question the validity of the prediction, but that doesn't mean its instantly discarded, as my prediction for THESE threads, so far, have been spot on.

I agree that it not always a fallacy but what constitutes a reasonable prediction is however relative, that being said on evaluation yours is reasonable.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 12, 2016, 03:42:36 PM
As I said, if YOU are ok with trans abuse, exclusion, excommunication, fights, ect ect, cool, but again, its risky to rim-world to add it as other people WILL FLIP, like carly (not you lady wolf =P), I'm sure if they were added, she would be extremely upset, possibly campaign against the game. Again, this is only a prediction, but she has said as much already.

Sounds like free publicity to me.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 12, 2016, 03:42:36 PM
While I agree, society should harden, I'm not a fool in thinking just because some ( a lot) of people are way too sensitive about hurt feelings , I know they also might still try to muck stuff up because of it. Question is, do we want rimworld to be an awesome game, or a possible martyr for anti censorship? This said, for your cousin, its not "just" time, but mental processes to go through to fix the damage, and this isn't always dealt with in x amount of time. A person in great mental health can overcome rape in a day, while a person can be damaged for years.

Somebody has to be the first to take a stand against excessive censorship here as good a place as any, in fact as a kickstarted game without a publisher to appease it probably a great place to start.

As for my cousin, her actual farther spent a small fortune on therapy, all his savings, selling his investment property and a second mortgage on his home and despite this she ends up sleeping around with multiple guys and she wants me to be a bleeding heart, now I know that her promiscuity is because of her being over sexualised as a child but are the rest of us supposed to treat her like she made of porcelain forever?

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 12, 2016, 03:42:36 PM
Actually, good point, and rimworld is a niche game....maybe we should let tumbler get outraged over stuff? But hey, tynans choice not mine.

Its definitely his choice and I think he'll play it safe since he's just starting his development company.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 12, 2016, 03:42:36 PM
Mass effect was massively over-rated IMO.

I 100% agree with this statement.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 12, 2016, 03:42:36 PM
This is an issue with rimworld, we all have ideas of what rimworld "should be" some think it should be a survival sims, some think it should be a more personally deep command and conquer, some think it should be a base builder primarily....and none of us are right or wrong, tynan at the end of the day is the owner, and chooses how the game evolves.

I know... as a long time DF fan the concept is not new to me, I'm merely sharing my opinion on the matter.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 12, 2016, 03:42:36 PM
I think modding argument is good IF the things added are obscure, add little to gameplay, and adding deeper framework to the maingame would be more beneficial. Think of it this way, if raids and location visiting was added, we could have bars / strip clubs we could potentially travel to, because the framework would be there for mods.

I'd rather run a bar or strip club then visit one, although add our own raid and location visiting raise the question of how they get there, do they walk? or maybe riding horse's, driving cars or even flying hover cars... now I've got the mental picture of tribal cavalry and pirate gunboats.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 12, 2016, 03:42:36 PM
Hah, drama between certain eccentric people disliking other eccentric people. Funny stuff. The fact carly gets offended instead of realizing the similarities says a lot. And again, slippery slope is hugely mis-interpeted. If Carly is going to reject zoophiles, while demanding inclusion, it IS fair for zoophiles, and others to reject her for being trans. Equality means getting same opportunities, same punishments, same bullshit, and same chance at being judged for who you are. Saying we can call zoophiles "stinking dog assaulters" or something silly, but at the same time demanding nobody even bring up people being trans in a negative light is incredibly unequal. For the record, not calling any zoophiles that, just making a point.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 12, 2016, 03:42:36 PM
I also agree zoophilia isn't always rape. Especially if a male dog mounts, that is all the dogs choice. Granted its hard to tell without verbal communication, but consent does not boil down to "if they said yes" but, "was the other person ok with it". I had sex countless times with my ex where we just jumped in the sack and had at it without a word, this wasn't rape because she obviously was ok with it. And actually, sex without verbal communication is far more enjoyable imo =) spontaneous is awesome.

I would say that how hard it is to tell depend upon your knowledge of that animals mating rituals, after all if you know how that animal acts during mating season and the "signs" of estrus/heat then its probably a lot easier to determine consent.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 12, 2016, 03:42:36 PM
Agreed, equality across the board of inclusion AND ability to be criticized is important. And yes, many, MANY people including those who have felt gender dysphoria (myself) view it as a mental illness, which people prevent even the bare minimum of discussion from happening. So even if people want to examine it, point out correlations to abuse, theories supported by evidence showing their case, they are often persecuted for even saying it.

Yeah, it a sorry state of affairs when reasonable discussion can't be had of the actually causes and effects of an issue because the answers might "upset" the balance...

I was reading about a study on the psychology of apologizing to people or not and its effect of the person doing the apology and they found that there are psychological benefits to standing your ground not apologizing, there was quite a few people complaining about the study because "the point of an apology is for the well being of others and society not yourself"...

Apparently it doesn't matter what the truth found in the study is, only whether it'll make people fell good about themselves or maintain the integrity of society, personally I'm more of a horrible truth over a wonderful lie kind of guy.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 12, 2016, 03:42:36 PM
Ditto.... This is why I view all sexual things as having a causation, and look at it as the merits of harm done, benefits, risks, and the whys / hows involved. For the record I find zoophilia more tolerable than transexuality, simply because I know the mental health mess behind it, mass suicide often done by post op transexuals, ect. But zoophilia people seem on average quite more stable.

Its always best to look at each case individually and then judge it on its own merits, not just slap a label of the entire subject and be done with it.

As for Zoos V Trans I don't know much about transexuality other then the obvious but I do know that some of the stuff I've read about zoo is troublesome, particularly the animal brothels they have in some places.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 12, 2016, 03:42:36 PM
Yeah, I guess it not a good risk for exclusion, but again, people being offended / throwing a fit... Plus really representing them in all the depth would be sooooooooooooooo much work.

Yeah, I'm starting to think your right on both accounts, spending all that time to include it only to piss a lot of people off is not really worth Tynan's time, especially when his career as an independent dev is on the line.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 12, 2016, 03:42:36 PM
I agree, and speaking to someone else on here who was a zoophile recently definitely was enlightening and they seem like a cool person, BUT, negative people in the same orientation also exist. There are straight people who are caring lovers, and straight people who are fucked up abusive people. There are gay people who lead good lives, and gay people who are "bug chasers" or have a thing for getting with straight guys by whatever means are available, including date rape... there are zoophiles who care for animals, and those that are torturous to them...I think we should represent the full spectrum, perhaps with  the sadism trait.

I think all these different traits could work so long as it was included along side both a beliefs system and a justice system, then Tynan cloud actually lessen the blow back a bit, he would be able to hold the position that it's a sandbox/simulation and that the player is given the tools to identify the risks and then deal with them as they occur.

An example being the player could decide that castrating rapists is the correct punishment or chemically gelding Zoos, basically chuck the ball back into the players court.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 12, 2016, 03:42:36 PM
Lol. But yes I agree, if I can be brought to tears because a man gets dumped after having body parts blown off because hes now disfigured before dying of infection because it emotionally hurt me, why should other people have their emotions guarded? If you are that scared of emotional pain, don't play the game.

Some of the most memorable moments are the ones that make you feel that twinge, its generally considered the sign of a good story teller if they can make you feel it.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 12, 2016, 03:42:36 PM
yep, very long post and response, but I love the community all the more for it. Even though I disagree with jester on some bits, I love the fact we can have an argument and not wage war from it =)

Enjoy it while it lasts, once the steam release hits I think there will be a lot of warriors for every cause joining the community and then...

mumble, I think you'll find I've been civil over most of the discussion so far.

I however find your comments wildly offensive (and I'm normally really not bothered that much), all the more so _because_ you state them in a calm and reasonable manner. It's one thing if someone comes in screaming bigotry, quite another if someone calmly stands and explains why the LGBT community is suppressing the rights of others, using misleading and misrepresented arguments - I'll get to why I consider these misleading below.

You make at least one good point though; I shouldn't have made that post. I made it because you really, really pissed me off, and because the thread is going off-topic again. It should be about gameplay elements of sexuality in RW, not the morality of the thing (because who cares, let's cannibalize some more babies). Since this appears largely a lost cause, let me explain myself further.

First, I'd like to call you out on your manipulative attempts to win the debate by virtue of persistence. If I don't reply, or don't make a lengthy response to your arguments, that doesn't automatically mean I agree - or even that you must be right. It's much more likely to mean that I've decided I have more rewarding things to do than try to convince you of what I consider common sense and human decency, regardless of however civil your argument may be. In addition, when more than half your last post is dedicated towards a personal attack on me, aren't you being just a teenie weenie little hypocritical? At least mine was just a single line.

In your argument I can find one main line of thought, that the LGBT (or whatever PC name they have these days) community is somehow persecuting religious small business owners - and that this poses a major thread to the small businesses' existence.

I'd like to know where that comes from, because I assume it's a US thing, for two reasons. First, in Europe, freedom of religion, as does any freedom, stops where someone else's freedom begins. If your freedom of religion allows you to discriminate toward other groups, you're infringing on their fundamental rights, and their freedoms. Freedom without boundaries is no freedom at all.

Second, in Europe, I can very much decide not to work for a project I don't support. There's two exceptions to that; I can't make those decisions based on race, sexuality, religion, and so forth (because that'd be discrimination, see above), and second, if I am a government employee, I have to put my personal preferences aside and provide equal services for everyone and everything.

So to put it another way, I CAN decide not to make a cake depicting zoophilia - because I think that's statutory rape, but I CANNOT decide not to make a cake for a zoophile - because that would be discrimination based on sexuality. There's a difference.
(actually zoophilia and bestiality are both illegal here, so I probably can refuse, but that's a different point).

I can believe that there have been occasional incidents, presumably even purposeful, where individual store owners have been targeted - maybe even unfairly. But to take such sporadic incidents and turn them around on a community that IS widely discriminated against, to the point where their entire way of life is regularly condemned on public television and personal verbal and physical attacks are appallingly common, that I find extremely offensive.

The second thread I can find in your argument is an objection to the often very focal, and sometimes downright nasty online 'voices' that claim to speak for the LGBT community (or indeed any other community). While I agree with you that such voices exist, and that they are detrimental to the debate, I would also like to point out that again, these voices are still a minority up against an increasingly violent and overwhelming majority. If you want some proof on this, just go to any youtube video that even tangents upon different sexualities, and compare the number of offensive comments - or even death threats. Ask any openly gay public figure, or anyone who advocates for the LGBT community how many death threats they receive on a daily basis. Sadly, this seems to be emblematic for the entirety of the public debate, which is increasingly polarized, and where mutual respect is continuously dwindling. Heck, even just count the posts in a very sheltered and low-key environment such as this thread.

Again, especially in this light, I find it so troubling that a seemingly well reasoned individual, would come here to make such an appalling and misleading argument. I don't always agree with the LGBT community, and I certainly don't always agree with their methods - but to paint them as the cause of the problem is like blaming a slave for rebelling against his master.

Okay, everything before this post was split off from a thread in Suggestions (https://ludeon.com/forums/index.php?topic=18664.0).  It's disjointed because that happens when we have to split threads, but this better reflects the two discussions that were emerging.  Use the thread in Suggestions for discussing actual RimWorld suggestions.  Play ball!

Jesus christ mumble, since we're off topic here I think I can finally directly say how I think how RIDICULOUS you are, and I mean this personally.

Even the stuff you said about the issue Europe faces. About how "pussified" Europeans are for not reacting to the refugee crisis. Can I ask you, where the fuck do you come from? Please, if you are from an affected country, then you have more legitimacy to talk about this stuff so ignorantly. If you don't, then seriously, stay out of our business.

Skissor,  that sounds like a personal attack. You even admit its personal.

I never once said pussified, you are trying to character assassinate me by trying to indicate i said things i didn't.

Second,  relatively sure anti Muslim opinions there are censored in many respects especially in Europe ,  which is a factor.  No,  I'm not from Europe,  but I've read enough. The fact "immigrants"  have no background checks often ,  elevated sexual assault turning sweden into a "rape capital" ,  court reluctance to deport rapists,  and population feeling guilty for their attackers being punished.  So yeah,  i think that is enough to form a judgement,  the fact that I'm not Europe dwelling doesn't mean i can't speak on that,  as that is censorship. I will state my opinion,  you are free to disagree,  but insulting me and putting words in my mouth isn't a debate,  its personal attacking and character assassination.

QuoteNo,  I'm not from Europe

That was pretty clear to me. The thing is , you are way too invested into "issues" which aren't even near your scope. (Also regarding your whole rant about transgender and gay issues). I think you probably just really like debating online.

And no, there isn't any "censoring" towards reporters who write basically anything. Depending on which country, there are multiple big and small independent reporting agencies so it is pretty much impossible to cover up anything, so it isn't easy to just only push a certain narrative. What you are saying would be conspiracy.

QuoteThe fact "immigrants"  have no background checks often

Do you work on the border? Do you have any idea how the different immigration policies look like in every single country and border that refugees have to cross? Why are you so sure of practically everything you're saying?

Quoteelevated sexual assault turning sweden into a "rape capital"

I've heard that one a hundred times. The short answer is that Sweden was the "rape capital" since forever, for the simple fact that abusive relationships which resulted in multiple rapes are counted individually, and Sweden is the only country in doing so. Instead of spouting ignorance, read up on it, it's really nothing new, and I have to say it's really shameful that you're using this "fact" to push your narrative against refugees.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_Sweden

Quoteand population feeling guilty for their attackerz being punished

What an incredibly subjective and bold statement. I don't feel guilty, so what now? This is only a question of representation. And I myself, being a very politically invested person in a european country, have never heard such an utter nonsense.

QuoteSo yeah,  i think that is enough to form a judgement,  the fact that I'm not Europe dwelling doesn't mean i can't speak on that,  as that is censorship. I will state my opinion

I have no problem whatsoever with you speaking your opinion. What I just love is people like you who just feel the need to talk about any issue, and being absolutely confident about what they are saying even if it might not be a simple one.

Mostly, this has a kind of know-it-all vibe that I just can't stand.

How would you like it if I wrote paragraphs like this:

QuoteSecondly, relatively sure pro gun opinions there are censored on many respects especially in Texas, which is a factor. No, I'm not from the US, but I've read enough.

Seriously, if I wrote the above nonsense, I would be absolutely ashamed because there is NO way I'm not going to rustle some  texan jimmies by writing like I know it better then people who are in the vicinity.
Yes, I should speak my opinion about gun regulation matters even if I'm not from the US, but for christs sake, I shouldn't spout my opinion in a manner that makes me look like I'm a teenager.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 13, 2016, 06:11:51 PM
No,  I'm not from Europe,  but I've read enough. The fact "immigrants"  have no background checks often ,  elevated sexual assault turning sweden into a "rape capital" ,  court reluctance to deport rapists,  and population feeling guilty for their attackers being punished.

I think the fact that you are basing your understanding of Europe on sensationalist media says enough.

I don't agree with mumble on everything, but he's on point when highlighting certain hypocrisies concerning the LGBT community, at least in the US. The whole "it's okay when we do it" sentiment only empowers your critics. If you believe that something is wrong, then you don't make arbitrary exceptions.

Quote from: Mathenaut on April 13, 2016, 06:40:10 PM

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 13, 2016, 06:11:51 PM
I think the fact that you are basing your understanding of Europe on sensationalist media says enough.

I was trying to find another way to describe what was wrong about mumble's opinions about Europe, but this one didn't come to my mind. It's definitely sensationalist. I think it's very sad that there are people who actually form their opinions based on this. :(

What media outlet covers it even? Most media gets blasted for even pointing out a rapists country of origin. Most places that i hear stuff about are investigations,  personal accounts,  or other stuff. Mainstream media almost completely ignores it.

Only thing i can think of was the magazine depicting a woman being assaulted,  but AFTER  countless assaults were made.  We can argue it's not all Muslim people,  certainly,  but something is very very wrong with the immigration system,  I've even heard of 35 year old men getting labeled as youth,  and treated as minors because they in no way can verify information,  and people are extremely encouraged not to doubt them on what they say.

I can understand some flexibility,  but there's way too much. And those who are immigrants should be,  if violent or criminal,  deported immediately.

This was an interesting read. I know this is in the off topic section but can you guys try to stay focused on a single issue. If you have a disagreement (even though i love to read these) i might suggest PMs. It cuts down on the needless banter from the bleachers. It was funny seeing this go from RW mechanics to the EU migrant crisis. Heck, i even saw a throw away texas gun joke haha. Point being, dont make these posts an oppurtunity to ad homenim. We all have our opinions and our sources. We all wont agree on every single issue. However, we can still learn from those we disagree with by asking the right questions.

Quote from: Carlyscarlet on April 11, 2016, 10:11:25 PM
As a transgender woman, I would requrest you to refrain from adding trans with the likes zoophilia. Zoophilia is a paraphilia, not a sexual orientation, and is highly frowned upon. Zoophilia is beastiality and beastiality is always rape because animals are incapable of consenting. On the other hand, transgender is an identity where a persons gender identity doesn't match their biological sex. They are in no way related and  its quite frankly insulting to see them next to each other in the same sentence. I'm not saying you intended to insult, but as a trans person it came off that way.

Also, transgender people added to this game would be... I don't know... difficult. Transgenderness has no effect on gameplay besides character detail. It depends really. Transgender people fully transitioned look almost indiscernible from their gender identity, so new models for them wouldn't be necessary. However, transgender people need to take hormones all their life to maintain their bodies. But then again, this is the future and we've probably got the technology to make it so that trans people are indiscernable to cis people entirely. But thinking about it, that sounds like something only Glitterworld tech or great Urbworld tech could do, not mining and underground colonies.

What I would do is have it come in different stages. Pawns have a chance to be transgender, but based on their background, they are at different stages of transition and look different. If a trans pawn is from an Urbworld/Glitterworld and isn't poor, then they look like the gender they are and have some biological upgrades (hormone regulator or something) on them. If a trans pawn is from anywhere else and/or has a poor background, they look more like their biological sex. Some gameplay things about transpeople would probably be their moods. Fully transitioned transpeople have a permanent mood buff while untransitioned transpeople have a permanent mood debuff. Sort of like the prostophile trait, except instead of bio-augmented parts its hormone replacement. If you transition an untransitioned transperson, you get a pawn with a better mood that is less likely to break, along with them looking like their gender identity.

I don't know about this ever being implemented in vanilla. It would be super sweet if it was. More representation of minorities is great, especially mine. It takes some more dev time, but I feel like it would be worth it. Definitely would recommend this game more to my trans buddies if trans people were included in vanilla.

I might not agree with your choices, Buts that's a whole other can of worms that would best be left unopened. I feel that, being a Classical liberal, minority's are people who do your gardening and such- Again, another can of worms. I feel that transgenders would be unnecessary, from a game play view. We can assume that, Either transgenders died off, where there was no need to change your sex, or, I assume that many of the glitter worlds are the result of a fascist regime/communist, both extremely intolerant, and as such, no people changed. Realistically speaking, upon landing the trans would go off hormones (None around) and revert to there original self.

 Quite seriously, I will speak my mind here. Screw the PC Bull. LGBT people are mentally ill and should seek help for there most -Unfortunate- position. Specifically I would like to say this more to the Trans; Lesbian/Gay/Bi have been observed in the wild, but never until recent history has there been people thinking there are the opposite sex; that is delusion, and they should get help.

I think comparisons to animals, for one is a shit argument to begin with,  animals aren't human. Seals for instance rape and kill penguins just because they can. This doesn't mean raping and killing random things is ok.  Also I don't see why people can't say animals are having chemical issues, hyper inflated sex drives,  or other issues causing it.  Its incredibly hard to tell either way,  but saying animals are gay isn't an argument for it being normal.

As for transgenderism being mentally unwell,  i agree,  every case I've seen that really open up usually have grievous abuse, absolutely no same sex role model,  and a different sex role model they looked up to a lot, chemical issues (prescriptions,  street drugs,  ect)  or physical issues to begin with (excessive testosterone in the womb for some girls,  boys eating a bunch of soy causing estrogen mimickers) a reason for thinking their own gender was inferior / the other superior, or other reasons.  I've seen it too much,  its incredibly sad. I had a trans friend for 5 years who was ftm, eventually talked about what happened,  being raped as a small child, feeling weak and helpless,  and wanting to become a big strong guy become of it,  word for word what she said.  She also defined herself as lesbian for years,  but after 5 years of me being there for her through all sorts of hell,  she confessed she had grown to like me,  and wanted intimacy.  This was a huge problem because it was extremely sudden bringing it up,  and eventually ended in breaking her heart because i rejected her because the hormones made her by no means attractive and frankly disgusting by a straight mans standards for desiring femininity ...  Really is a shame,  but i hurt her badly from that.  After she spiraled into alcoholism m,  i started to piece things together and it all made sense,  compared to before  i would ask her questions and never get it but still  "treat her like a guy".  Except treating her like a guy didn't work,  because she wasn't a guy,  I'd have to watch my step and be very selective how i spoke about anything,  and there would often be tantrums thrown for no explained reason. I had to try and give respect like she was "another dude",  yet put on kid gloves,  tolerate shit talking / other crap that she would throw a fit if u ever turned it around back on her. Would literally push buttons all day then get all hurt if i do it even once back.

So yeah... I think there's dozens of reasons they are mentally unsound.  The only situation im less quick to say this is hermaphrodites, they cannot change the flesh they were born with,  and that us truly difficult, but them i don't mind them being whatever, because genital mutilation sucks.  That said,  these people are extremely rare,  and most definitely caused to be that way from birth. 

Quote from: Fluffy (l2032) on April 13, 2016, 08:44:11 AM
First, I'd like to call you out on your manipulative attempts to win the debate by virtue of persistence. If I don't reply, or don't make a lengthy response to your arguments, that doesn't automatically mean I agree - or even that you must be right.

In any competitive endeavor if your opponent gives up you do win by default.

Quote from: Fluffy (l2032) on April 13, 2016, 08:44:11 AM
I'd like to know where that comes from, because I assume it's a US thing, for two reasons. First, in Europe, freedom of religion, as does any freedom, stops where someone else's freedom begins. If your freedom of religion allows you to discriminate toward other groups, you're infringing on their fundamental rights, and their freedoms.

Yes, "my freedom to swing my arm ends at your freedom to not be hit" is how I've heard that put before, also there are no "fundamental" rights, only privileges given to you by the society that you live in, go somewhere those rights aren't recognized and you won't have them.

Quote from: Fluffy (l2032) on April 13, 2016, 08:44:11 AM
Freedom without boundaries is no freedom at all.

This is the most ludicrous thing I've heard in a while, imho freedom with boundaries is not really freedom as freedom is the ability to do what you will, and the text book definition of freedom agrees.

Quote1The power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants: we do have some freedom of choice [count noun]: he talked of revoking some of the freedoms
More example sentences Synonyms
1.1Absence of subjection to foreign domination or despotic government: he was a champion of Irish freedom
More example sentences Synonyms
1.2The power of self-determination attributed to the will; the quality of being independent of fate or necessity.

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/freedom (http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/freedom)

Quote from: Fluffy (l2032) on April 13, 2016, 08:44:11 AM
Second, in Europe, I can very much decide not to work for a project I don't support. There's two exceptions to that; I can't make those decisions based on race, sexuality, religion, and so forth (because that'd be discrimination, see above), and second, if I am a government employee, I have to put my personal preferences aside and provide equal services for everyone and everything.

I think that only the government should be bound by such laws, If someone in private industry wants to refuse service because of reasons then the consequences shouldn't be legal but economic and social, a business that refuses service can loses customers and a individual could lose friends and if people don't care then its just freewill at work.

Quote from: Fluffy (l2032) on April 13, 2016, 08:44:11 AM
So to put it another way, I CAN decide not to make a cake depicting zoophilia - because I think that's statutory rape, but I CANNOT decide not to make a cake for a zoophile - because that would be discrimination based on sexuality. There's a difference.
(actually zoophilia and bestiality are both illegal here, so I probably can refuse, but that's a different point).

But I think you should you able to do it for no reason other then it disgusts you personally, personal freedom and all that, why should your freedom be limited by someone elses emotional stability?

Quote from: Fluffy (l2032) on April 13, 2016, 08:44:11 AM
Again, especially in this light, I find it so troubling that a seemingly well reasoned individual, would come here to make such an appalling and misleading argument. I don't always agree with the LGBT community, and I certainly don't always agree with their methods - but to paint them as the cause of the problem is like blaming a slave for rebelling against his master.

A slave that rebels against his master should not be surprised by his fate and a master should not be surprised by a slaves desire for freedom, for reference I personally disagree with slavery but I don't think its wrong from an objective standpoint.

As a relativist I believe that whats right is based on nothing more the subjective values of the society and individual and that there is no correct answer when it comes to questions of right and wrong.

As Nietzsche once said.

QuoteYou have your way. I have my way. As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist.

Haha, glad to see i can take a break from responding,  thanks jester.  I admit i don't agree with you entirely on everything,  the philosophical quote at the end im particularly on the fence about,  but i agree with pretty much all you said there.

On the slave thing fluffy ,  this is an overboard comparison. Gay,  les,  trans people are not viewed as property,  nowhere near as oppressed as many people have been in the past,  legal means defend and protect them,  and often times the  "self defense"  they do legally is grossly disproportionate,  shutting down a business and ruining lives over someone's feeling getting "potentially"  hurt emotionally.  This is like if you came up and called me a douche and i pulled out a knife and stabbed you 37 times in the chest.  Yes, its reactionary.  Yes,  you "started"  the conflict.  Yes I'm doing it "to protect myself"  in a really weird way (I'm no in any danger of course it would be to protect my "feelings" )  and yes,  it wouldn't of happened if you didn't call me a douche,  but there's dozens and dozens of better responses,  like,  i don't know,  walking away? Calling you something worse? Smile and shake my head? This is why many people have issues,  the response is generally militant,  and people are getting sick of being pushed around by the smallest resistance being met with lawsuits,  threats,  violence,  ect.  Its unjust to do so, law in itself is not morality,  understand that. Just because law allows something,  does not make it right. Oh also unlike slaves,  LGBT have the choice to avoid these issues by choosing not to act on the feelings they have. Just because you feel something doesn't mean you must act on it.

Quote from: mumblemumble on April 13, 2016, 07:35:16 PM
What media outlet covers it even? Most media gets blasted for even pointing out a rapists country of origin. Most places that i hear stuff about are investigations,  personal accounts,  or other stuff. Mainstream media almost completely ignores it.

Only thing i can think of was the magazine depicting a woman being assaulted,  but AFTER  countless assaults were made.  We can argue it's not all Muslim people,  certainly,  but something is very very wrong with the immigration system,  I've even heard of 35 year old men getting labeled as youth,  and treated as minors because they in no way can verify information,  and people are extremely encouraged not to doubt them on what they say.

I can understand some flexibility,  but there's way too much. And those who are immigrants should be,  if violent or criminal,  deported immediately.

I mean, again, like Mathenaut already said, I think the fact that you are basing your understanding of Europe on sensationalist media says enough.

Why does this thread even exists? It's an outlet for screaming and ingratitude. There's no place for this here and it should not be provided for people.

I'm sorry about however offended or hurt or what the hell ever people have to say about anything regarding this topic, but this is a game. Just play the fucking game and stop screaming and demanding more things. I don't care who you are.

@Didact; I tend to agree - but this is in offtopic, and the mods have so far allowed it to continue, so I feel like I have to give a countervoice - if only so random bypassers don't get the wrong idea about this forum.
@Skissor; yep - but see above reasons. I have little hope my voice will convince either Jester or Mumble, but at least others who come by here will hopefully see that their view is not uncontested (and maybe even that it's just plain wrong - one can hope).

QuoteIn any competitive endeavor if your opponent gives up you do win by default.

Thats the thing. Society - the civilized kind - shouldn't be a competitive endeavour. Neither is a debate - the point is to convince the other. If that point is clearly out of reach, why continue?
(Which is a question I'm asking myself right now, but screw it - I have work to avoid, and a bone to pick.)

Quotethere are no "fundamental" rights, only privileges given to you by the society that you live in, go somewhere those rights aren't recognized and you won't have them.

Thankfully, the United Nations would disagree.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human_Rights

Quotefreedom with boundaries is not really freedom as freedom is the ability to do what you will, and the text book definition of freedom agrees

That doesn't work in a society. If you define freedom like that, it inevitably means there's a suppresed minority that enjoys no freedoms at all.
Try googling for "freedom in society" instead of just looking up textbook definitions. Here's a decent start: http://www.energygrid.com/freedom/freedom.html

QuoteI think that only the government should be bound by such laws, If someone in private industry wants to refuse service because of reasons then the consequences shouldn't be legal but economic and social, a business that refuses service can loses customers and a individual could lose friends and if people don't care then its just freewill at work.

That's an incredibly laissez-faire point of view, which might even work if we had perfect information. Just letting companies do what they want has proven time and again not to work, which is why there's rules and regulations limiting their activities - and ideally independent oversight making sure those rules are abided by.

Quotewhy should your freedom be limited by someone elses emotional stability?

Why should someone elses freedom be limited by my personal opinion? What makes me (or us) more important that someone else (or them)?

QuoteYou have your way. I have my way. As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist.

Let's get philosophical then; ever heard of Kant's categorical imperative?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categorical_imperative

Or, in plainer and more familiar terms, the golden rule?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Rule

Equal application of laws to ALL is the foundation of the rule of law, the foundation of the modern state, and the ONLY way EVERYONE can have their fundamental freedoms. The moment you start making exceptions for particular groups, you break down the foundations of freedom. To paraphrase the golden rule; what if you lived in a predominantly gay/black/whatever society? Would you not want to be protected from discrimination and suppression? Without the rule of law - and the boundaries on personal freedoms that brings - you would be at the mercy of the majority's kindness.

Oh, some final points. Europeans have, only 60 years ago - which in the grand scheme of things is quite recently, had a first hand experience with fascism, oppression and the cessation of rule of law. The absolute freedom you're describing is actually much, much closer to fascism than the bounded freedom I'm describing. After all, fascism basically means that one group (be they arians, christians, heterosexuals, or all of the above) have unlimited freedom, at the expense of everyone else.

It is the horrors that happened in the second world war that lead to the creation of the United Nations, the declaration of fundamental human rights, and ultimately the European Union and it's open borders. I personally find it extremely disappointing how quickly we have forgotten these horrors, and how unwilling we are to help those that are experiencing events - war, oppression, etc. - that are (thank god!) now almost impossible to imagine within the EU's borders. There's one thing I can agree on with you, those who abuse our hard-won freedoms should be punished - sent back if need be. But the sporadic (and they are sporadic - 'mundane' crime committed by native citizens isn't quite so interesting to the media) incidents involving immigrants should absolutely not be a reason to allow the suffering of hundreds of thousands of humans to continue, while we look the other way.

Quote from: JesterHell on April 14, 2016, 04:30:37 AM

Quote from: Fluffy (l2032) on April 13, 2016, 08:44:11 AM
Freedom without boundaries is no freedom at all.

This is the most ludicrous thing I've heard in a while, imho freedom with boundaries is not really freedom as freedom is the ability to do what you will, and the text book definition of freedom agrees.

Lol please, this is ridiculous how old are you? Tell me one respectable country that doesn't have "restricted" freedom? Pretty much every first world country lives by the rule of "your freedom ends where my rights begin" so what you are saying is impossible to implement in any society anyway. Every democratic society is a nation with "freedom with boundaries".

Seriously, it's like were debating Sociology 101 with teenagers here. I didn't really want to chime in in this thread anymore but things like this just have to be addressed.

Quotethere are no "fundamental" rights, only privileges given to you by the society that you live in, go somewhere those rights aren't recognized and you won't have them.

Ever heard of the united nations?

Okay, I'm going to stop this train now.  It's gone way off the tracks and tempers are running a little too high.  Take a break, and thank you for your participation.

If there is any thoughtful discussion you'd still like to have, I invite you to start a new thread about it in the appropriate subforum.  No personal attacks or sustained hostility/venting, please, but on-point discussion & debate are welcome.  I've been lenient with our rules so far, but that isn't helping the forum be the welcoming community that we all want.

If you need a reminder of the forum rules, they're here:
https://ludeon.com/forums/index.php?topic=122.0

Let's all work together to keep this forum great!