New Sexuality Calc

[SuperCaffeineDude]

Hi there, this great game somewhat undeservedly took a bit of flack, however I'd like to make some suggestions towards a new system that still simulates that discrepancy of nature & nurture, but in a way that is legible and easily adjustable.

Give each sexuality an adjustable percentage chance of occurring per sex.
Give each background a conservativeness rating, that will negate or even increase the chances of being LGB, and could influence religion, skills (like art), and other stats in time.

Here is some ork-ish of my idea laid out.

Code Select Expand

public class SexualityCalc : MonoBehaviour {
public bool is_male;
public bool digs_men;
public bool digs_women;
public float pawnLabido;

public float societyConservativeness; // should not really be more than the lowest stat...
//a spacer might be -25f, a modern 0f, a primative 2.45f
public float pawnConservativeness;
//how worried the pawn is about breaking convention, or how much they want to rebel

//Values should not exceed 100
public float percent_FemaleSex = 50.5f;
//Chance of being a girl
public float percent_MaleGay = 6.5f;
public float percent_FmaleGay = 4f;
public float percent_MaleBi = 2.5f;
public float percent_FmaleBi = 8f;
//Basic chance of being LGB, guessed since stats are very vague and seem bias.

public bool hasOccured;
//Has instance occured to pawn

//My Counters for example
public int counter_BiMale;
public int counter_BiFmale;
public int counter_GayMale;
public int counter_GayFmale;
public int counter_HetroFmale;
public int counter_HetroMale;

// Update is called once per frame
void Update () {
RollSex ();
}
void CalcChance(float chance){
hasOccured = false;
float roll = Random.Range (0f, 100f);
if (roll <= chance) {
hasOccured = true;
}
}
void RollSex(){
pawnLabido = Random.Range (0f, 100f);
pawnConservativeness = Random.Range (societyConservativeness - 0.25f, societyConservativeness + 0.25f);

CalcChance (percent_FemaleSex);
if (hasOccured) {
is_male = false;
} else {
is_male = true;
}
//Dudes
if (is_male) { //Homo
CalcChance (percent_MaleGay - pawnConservativeness);
if (hasOccured) {
digs_men = true;
digs_women = false;
Debug.Log ("Is Gay Male");
counter_GayMale++;
} else { //Bi
CalcChance (percent_MaleBi - pawnConservativeness);
if (hasOccured == true) {
digs_men = true;
digs_women = true;
Debug.Log ("Is Bi Male");
counter_BiMale++;
}else{ //Hetro
digs_men = false;
digs_women = true;
Debug.Log ("Is Hetro Male");
counter_HetroMale++;
}
}
}
//Ladies
if (!is_male) { //Homo
CalcChance (percent_FmaleGay - pawnConservativeness);
if (hasOccured) {
digs_men = false;
digs_women = true;
Debug.Log ("Is Gay Female");
counter_GayFmale++;
} else { //Bi
CalcChance (percent_FmaleBi - pawnConservativeness);
if (hasOccured) {
digs_men = true;
digs_women = true;
Debug.Log ("Is Bi Female");
counter_BiFmale++;
}else{ //Hetro
digs_men = true;
digs_women = false;
Debug.Log ("Is Hetro Female");
counter_HetroFmale++;
}
}
}
}
}

So using this a pop of 1000 "moderns" might host...
8 bi-male
45 bi-female
27 gay-male
23 gay-female
460 odd hetro-female
440 odd hetro-male

A 1000 pop medieval society might host...
0 bi-male
30 bi-female
23 gay-male
8 gay-female
447 odd hetro-female
492 odd hetro-male

A 1000 pop spacer society might host...
103 bi-male
106 bi-female
155 gay-male
132 gay-female
269 odd hetro-female
246 odd hetro-male

These were just one sample from the code, and the code and the stats I used are very primitive, but I'm just trying to communicate the basic concept here.

And as mentioned it'd be lovely to see other stats derived from the conservativeness of a people.

[mumblemumble]

I think its a GROSS assumption to assume that glitter-worlds would be full of gay people. it comes from culture, and commonly can arise from stimulus earlier in life.

Quite simply, we have 0 information on what a hypothetical super future colonies would be like, so we cannot say if they would be more gay.

We do however have information out there on gay people, and correlations of causes with the opposite being UNTRUE (this is the big point behind correlations =/= causation, yes most people who drink water die, but people who never drink water die MUCH FASTER. Thus, the correlation holds no weight) So we could have reason to believe certain events, triggers, or trauma may cause it.

...Its a shame people rarely look at such data.

[SuperCaffeineDude]

To jump on such a fire before it spreads, I'm making the difference more pronounced than I actually believe it would be, a space faring culture could be from anywhere, and could foster odd ideas, and allow for much more experimentation.

For instance in the sci-fi novel "The Forever War", due to population/breeding controls, being hetro becomes frowned upon, and the 21st century veteran and protagonist receives much flack for being hetro in a cloned army. The proposal though odd, is no stranger than other aspects proposed within the Rimworld universe.

The data I have been able to obtain is all heavily biased, either from LGB groups asserting as much as 20%, or a fraction of 1% from conservative areas. These are private details for many, with only a fraction of the population being surveyed and a certain % of them likely opting to lie or give no information.

But as mentioned using more easily adjustable variables is a start towards making these aspects easier to simulate.

[mumblemumble]

Never read the book, but.... getting RID of people is much harder than GROWING population. So I find this idea silly. Its easy to cull population with disease, disasters, war, ect....

I do agree much evidence is biased both ways, but also I think sexuality is far from static either...but thats going off topic. You can PM me about if you want.

The mention of experimentation is funny, by the way... this is partially true, but experimentation solely for the means of a whim (theres a difference between R&D experimenting and say, experimenting with drugs) often leads to decay of society. Its one of the reasons china and japan are so advanced, is there's almost no damn room for it, its run tightly, and people who do not adhere to things are shunned...yes this has problems, but also has benefits of having a high standard held better. So in a way, perhaps a glitter-world would DISCOURAGE experimentation of things without a damn solid argument for them. but in the end, also comes down to parenting culture.  Which is another thing, medieval I think would also quantify as the greek / rome times, yet some of those countries were extremely gay. while some current societies are very anti gay, even when the world culture in general is more accepting (and forcing it on others). so time / tech  is not a cause of it being higher

By the way, thanks for not freaking out at my response. This surprised me, I've had many people call me a bigot for such a response in the past. You really surprised me by remaining calm, thanks.

[O Negative]

The non-existence of bisexual men is being fixed in the next alpha, and that was one of the main points of that awful article.

The only thing that I honestly think could use an adjustment is the obvious "Men usually start the relationship" idea written within the code.
Sure, women can make advances towards men, but it's intentionally been made to be less likely.
I have no issues with this attempt to be statistically accurate, by Tynan. He does his research.
It's just a choice that has to be made: To P.C. or not to P.C.?
Personally, I have no preference. I'd be happy with the system either way.

[SuperCaffeineDude]

That is fine mumblemumble, I know you have strong views regarding sexuality.

O Negative, I understood that it was being resolved, and I feel like I agree with you regarding the article. Very disappointing, an author living in the exception trying to force a narrative where one does not exist. Regardless there is my suggestion.

The men starting a relationship, is also something that I would love to see tied into the conservativeness of each pawn and their background.
But on paper, men asking women out as the norm is seems fine to me, just tame down the stat would be my suggestion.

The problem with the "it's the future haven't we moved on yet" argument is that rimworld's lore is based around recurring history, so we need to ask what is innate to greater ape we call a human? So whilst being P.C is the easiest course, I would be somewhat disappointed if the simulation did not venture into portraying this aspect somewhat accurately.

[mumblemumble]

Tbh, I think the idea that women flirt more than men is very unhealthy to promote...ive seen many young boys who dont flirt, and say they will wait for a girl to sweep them off their feet, which is sad, because statistically this is impossible to happen.

We should have expectations of reality that reflect the average of reality.

But I will say,  as much as I love rimworld, the deep simulation + mental health means it will always bring disagreements...especially when the human psyche is understood by so very few.

I'm just glad that, so far, no SJWs have made a fit over the article.

[O Negative]

Plenty of them have. They just haven't made it here yet. Tynan had to defend himself on Twitter for what seemed like an eternity.

[daduhweewah]

Where is this article? I am sure I will enjoy reading it, because you know, this is what is important in the world today, and Tynan should HAVE to defend himself for making inaccurate calculations on such an important issue (if I understand right, that is what I understood from this article, I am being sarcastic though but still want the article)

[fetusthebard]

Statistician popping in to say that most statistical data points towards the LGBTQ crowd being between 2-10% of the overall population, regardless of closeted individuals. Most of this data is acquired through aggregating dating sites, census data, polls, and social media sites to attempt to capture a statistic as close to the population as possible. As far as we can tell, this data hasn't been changing despite many places becoming far more accepting. The conclusions that we can draw from this are either there is a specific cultural norm in the US that is holding the population relatively constant, or that this has been and always will be the norm for humanity.

I'm not really one to believe that some outside social factor has giant influence affecting even rates of homosexuality, otherwise conservatives would have exploited this decades ago, but I'll allow the reader to come to their own conclusions.

[O Negative]

Statistician popping in to say that most statistical data points towards the LGBTQ crowd being between 2-10% of the overall population, regardless of closeted individuals. Most of this data is acquired through aggregating dating sites, census data, polls, and social media sites to attempt to capture a statistic as close to the population as possible. As far as we can tell, this data hasn't been changing despite many places becoming far more accepting. The conclusions that we can draw from this are either there is a specific cultural norm in the US that is holding the population relatively constant, or that this has been and always will be the norm for humanity.

I'm not really one to believe that some outside social factor has giant influence affecting even rates of homosexuality, otherwise conservatives would have exploited this decades ago, but I'll allow the reader to come to their own conclusions.

Thank you for the input. I love statistics and the information it brings to light

[mumblemumble]

problem is,whos to say what "in  the closet" means?