Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DarkKestral" data-source="post: 2884550" data-attributes="member: 40100">Another thing to think about is that, in political games, the IMPLICATION of who is sleeping with who is more important than the act, in many ways, so don't necessarily worry about whether or not indvidual characters are likely to have homosexual or bisexual tendencies and relationships, rather focus instead on what the fallout is when things tend to implicate NPCs and PCs in disapproved-of relationships of various types be they sexual or not. The duke favoring the vassal may not be homosexual, and the vassal may be his bastard son that he likes because the vassal's not really a boot-licker, like his actual heirs. However, he may appear homosexual, because no one seems to find him in relationships with women. (Perhaps he's the sort that doesn't "kiss and tell") While sexuality itself is all well-and-good as a concept to introduce, societal class relationships are often more important. A culture that is incredibly accepting of homosexuality and tends to romanticize homosexual relationships while marginalizing heterosexual ones (the Greeks are a good example of this, actually) may still find such a relationship wrong because the vassal is of a lower social class than the acceptable minimum for the duke to have any sort of apparent relationship with, sexual or not. A culture that isn't accepting of homosexuality may find it wrong because the vassal is a bastard child of the duke. In neither case was the specifics of the sexuality of the duke necessarily the important factor. So, in practice, sexuality can also be hand-waved if you use some deftness and skill in 'cutting away' at the right moments. If it's open, the PDA can be described as "hand-holding and hugging are common signs of affection, regardless of gender. Public kissing, however, is rare, and viewed as shameful." Note, at no time, did I mention any actual sexuality, but at the same time, you've already got a good idea of how this culture approaches affection. If you need to go further, than you can, but I would argue that in most cases it's not needed. Sex CAN stay in the bedroom, believe it or not.However, class views of marriage and of sexual propriety are a bit more important than straight sexuality. (yes, it was a bit of a pun.. this topic's a bit heavy and could use some humor) Historically, there have been three basic versions of the intentions of marriage: A) Marriage should be romance B) Marriage should provide for procreation C) Marriage should help create power blocs. Social class also had a split: Lower class, middle class, and upper class.Lower social classes historically have favored a combo of A and B rationales. Middle classes, most often the A and C combo. The upper classes, the B and C combo of rationales. While there have been variants, these have been traditional. The "middle class" has largely existed only since the late 1700's or so, and as a result, in most societies, the sexual habits of the rich often diverge from the rest of society quite a bit. Variously, the rich have romanticized homosexuality while commoners often practiced mostly heterosexuality, and the rich have also romanticized heterosexuality when commoners didn't care, were bisexual, or were homosexual in general tendencies not associated with procreation. Additionally, bastardy and incest have been common at times among the rich when they weren't among the general masses and vice versa. Assume, then, that rather than homosexuality/heterosexuality being the big division of how people define their sex lives, they define it by social class.Thus, rather than put any possible 'X is odd" onus on sexuality, assume some element of society will always think what they view as the worst possible crime against the social order is happening when they see comparatively odd behavior that might be sex-linked. If you don't intimate directly someone's orientation, you can also gauge the reactions of players without needing to bust them over the heads with the idea that there might be GLBT characters in the game ahead of time. Of course, that STILL might backfire, depending on the social views of players, but if they're that strongly against sex outside of marriage, it's probably a reasonable assumption in the overall American culture at this time that they'll also be against the presence of GLBT characters in-game. Of course, your milage may vary...</blockquote>

Verification