“I’m in an oppressed minority group.”
There is nothing virtuous about this, you just belittle yourself like a prey trying not to get eaten.
Yes you are fewer, but that doesn’t mean you should define yourselves by your sexual preferance.
It is not your identity, it is your sexual preference. Heterosexual people don’t tell others; not because they’re a majority but because it doesn’t define their character or personality.
Don’t fall into this group identity trap, you’re a normal person even if you have a different sexual preferance than most, it does not define you.
What really should be discussed is how one of the first backpack items was through the recruit-a-friend system. Something like that should be obtainable ingame without the RAF system. I just want to be represented with a backpack for all my characters but no, I must go through the RAF system. Pathetic.
This thread is about someone who is happy that a character in wow references a husband. That’s it. They said it was nice to see characters they can relate to a bit more.
Nobody mentioned being defined by sexuality. It’s actually really funny how when someone LGBT says they can relate, people start hot taking them asking them to stop defining themselves by their sexuality.
Wheres this helpful busybody attitude for the other people who define themselves by their sexuality (and actually do so)? Like the incels who rage life is unjust because they can’t get girls, or the teenage lads who think they’re a failure if they haven’t shagged X girls by Y age? What about the girls who are afraid they’ll be seen as wierd if they don’t have a boyfriend or sleep with guys by X date? What about the WoW players who bemoan never finding a GF/BF? Where on earth is the “stop defining yourself by your sexuality” then?
Or better still, when a straight friend of yours is excited to tell you about a new squeeze, do you put your hand up and go “whoa, steady on, defining yourself by your sexuality isn’t cool”.
No, because it’s prat behaviour.
There is an ocean of difference between someone saying they can relate to a characteristic and someone saying that’s all they are about, and nobody in this thread has said that. It’s literally “it’s a gay person, so in my mind that’s their only defining characteristic” confirmation bias.
It’s really telling that people feel some wierd need to bear down on the “loud and proud in your face gay person” every time a LGBT thread comes up when in 99 % of cases it’s not an instance of that kind of gay person.
Like who cares. You dislike obnoxiously loud people and token gays. So what? That’s got nothing to do with the thread so you’re just defending your “I don’t hate gay people” stance by randomly bringing up a completely unrelated kind of gay person to bash? Okay?
Unless of course you’re suggesting that a gay character mentioning they’re gay incidentally by casually mentioning a same sex partner in passing counts as “loud” and being token? Because if not why on earth go on the rant?
If you complain about a character being “defined by their sexuality” whilst ignoring all the other traits and their existence outside of their sexuality, then it’s not us who are trying to make our sexuality our only personality trait. It’s you, refusing to see us as the same kind of human as others - complex, intricate and worthy of happiness. It’s you who reduces us to “the gays”.
But they are presented as two males as they are now. It is fine that you don’t see them as gay, that’s your opinion and you are free to have it. Just don’t try and take it away from those of us who do see them as gay and are happy about that, please and thank you.
Irrelevant anyway. They’re Fyzandians, whom appear as animals given they’re in the Shadowlands. Going from the descriptions they offer, their culture was a civilised one, so unless you’re suggesting that stags in WoW constructed a huge civilisation, developed worship of Elune and fought off an Old God, you have to concede they were in all probability a humanoid sentient and sapient race, which means the label of homosexuality applies.
Unless you’re suggesting they have to be human to have it apply. In which case what would we then call a male Orc whom has relations with other male Orcs? Nothing?
Sounds to me like you’re trying to define the “problem” out of existence. You can interpret it however you like, but your interpretation is wrong. They are most definitely a visible form of homosexual relationship according to pretty much how we use the word and what we apply it to within fantasy worlds (ie if a race is humanoid, sentient and sapient we tend to use terms we use to describe humans to describe their behaviour unless they explicitly define the behaviour as otherwise)
The fact they’re animals now is irrelevant given they behave as prior simply in animal form. Ie they have identical thoughts, feelings and comprehensions as they did when alive, which means they can still recognise phenomenon such as love and marriage. They haven’t turned into literal animals who just chew grass all day.
By that logic a gay couple who put on stag costumes are no longer gay, despite the fact they still think exactly the same, because “stags aren’t gay”. Which is a debatable point anyway.
Using male pronouns doesn’t input they are male, we use male pronouns for angels too in the chatolich church, still they are genderless.
Also only one of them called him husband so there is a 50% chance that the other one could have been a male or a female when they where alive.
Making them the facto not gay or straight either.
@tristam
First point we are talking of gosth animals not regular ones in their current form.
Second point they never described their phisical appearance only how their structure functioned.
This mean that we don’t know what where their real phisical appearance, they could even have one gender in their race, making them both gay and straight at the same time.
they could have no gender at all, making them on par as angels for example where we use masculine pronounce/wording but they are genderless
So no your logic is flawed.
Is not simple that im saying “animals are not gay” I’m saying that there are not any factable proofs regarding their phisical appearance of their previous life that makes them a gay or a straight coupple.
