Do you 'support' LGBT supports in "Fire Emblem: if"?

[Espinosa]

If the motivation behind such an implementation is accurate representation of our reality (or some of our realities) and this realism is the basis for the innovation, then you wouldn't have a lot of space for romance I'm afraid. Around 2% (and that could be really generous apparently) people are homosexual, which is one 1 person out of 50. If the game's cast is sizeable enough, you might chance to have one gay character, and they'd be pretty lonely as a result, and wouldn't be able to have any relationships unless they exercised a level of power that they could drag others into it despite their will. Realistic, but way too grim to happen and wouldn't please anyone besides extreme fetishists or people wanting to get a good laugh. If characters are exclusive to either Nohr or Hoshido, then they wouldn't be able to meet each other either.

[eclipse]

This, please and thank you. I might just cry if we get a Vincent/Victor duo in this game.

I understand that marriage or romance isn't the central focus of this game, but I don't think it would hurt to add one LGBT playable character, even if their sexuality is just hinted at.

Although, I honestly wouldn't be surprised if they didn't have any realistic LGBT characters in FE:if at the end, but I would personally be somewhat disappointed as a lesbian girl. at least let me marry Rinka or Aqua...

Soren.

Yes yes yes, please. I'm bi, and I'd love to see more representation in the game (I don't view Kamui as a self-insert but the option of same-sex romance would be nice) Although knowing most Japanese games with a similar support system, they're going to screw it up by making the lgbqt characters super tropey and borderline offensive.

This is why I don't support it - because I don't think the characters will be strong enough for it. Instead, it'll be seen as some sort of quirk/trope, when QUILTBAG is quite the opposite.

I'd really just like the games to focus around strategy and less pairings in general. Period.

Somewhat? I think part of the strategy in optimized!Awakening was knowing which pairings would produce the best children (and knowing that Vaike and Lissa were best off with other people).

I feel like people being uncomfortable with this subject is another reason why LGBT characters and supports should be included. It goes to show that people haven't been exposed enough to this where it's still seen as something abnormal.

So, what's your take on the other sexual deviations that people claim to have, including the illegal ones?

Holy cow. I did not expect this to hit 7 pages before I finished work tonight.

I'll go through and multiquote some of you instead of adding another page of just responses.

Glad to see that we're 83% to 17% in favor of LGBT supports in a FE game though, I'm happy that Serene's Forest is so inclusive.

I'm spiteful enough to skew your numbers with my vote, regardless of how I felt about the issue. In other words, don't use random internet polls to support your position.

I would love for LGBT relationships to be represented, but only if they are pulled off well. And in all honesty, I'm not confident in IS' ability to make a LGBT character without said character's sexuality being the whole basis of their personality or acting like a LGTB caricature. It would be nice if LGBT relationships were pulled off well, but I don't think it will happen sadly.

This sums up half my logic. The other half is that turning such things into tropes hurts the movement overall - they're people, not a personality quirk.

They aren't. You can grind any unit in the game with an item called a Reeking box. Once the level is maxed out, you can use a new item called a Second Seal to change to a different class while retaining all of your stat gains.

All of the stats of one character can be higher than 40 halfway through the game. Most of the enemies outside optional maps never come close to matching you.

By the time you clear the maps that you get the kids from, they'll be too weak to be of any use outside supports.

Grinding is not mandatory, and there are Lunatic(+) runs that prove it.

I want to have furry relationships in FE if

and not just with the fox spirit guy

Panne/Yarne weren't enough for you?

If it doesn't bother you, then why stop it from reaching people who want it?

Because it'll definitely come across as pandering, especially given the tropey nature of Awakening. 'sides, why not go ALL THE WAY?

we need more asexual characters

. . .like this.

I'd rather see someone who's bi - IIRC, they get shit on by quite a few people, and I think a well-written example of one would be amazing. Likewise, I wouldn't mind seeing someone who's asexual, simply because it forces zero marriages, and acknowledges the fact that some people just aren't interested, full stop. However, I don't have enough faith in the writers to do anything outside of straight without screwing it up horribly, which is why I won't support it until I feel that the writing team is strong enough for it. Perhaps I'll change my mind in the future.

[Lexington]

As a gay male I'd love to see well written same-sex relationships in FE games.

But personally I think that even a lot of heterosexual relationships in FE:A were quite unconvincing, mainly because of the friendship to romance jump between A and S support.

So they might have even more problems writing convincing homosexual ones. They'd be under a lot more scrutiny and if they're not handled well, that might lead to quite some backlash.

I'd already be happy if they bring back the non-romantic paired endings and some people ending up as heterosexual life partners. A well-written friendship is worth more than a badly written romance.

[Light Master]

Doesn't meke sense put LGBT characters in a medieval setting, and we don't know if they will even include a "pairing system" (PLEASE DON'T INCLUDE)

And one more thing the waifu shit is not the focus of the game, only informing, and appears they will not put it in first place like in awakening.

Edited June 6, 2015 by Light Master

[Soapbar]

Doesn't meke sense put LGBT characters in a medieval setting, and we don't know if they will even include a "pairing system" (PLEASE DON'T INCLUDE)

And one more thing the waifu shit is not the focus of the game, only informing, and appears they will not put it in first place like in awakening.

By this logic, we should also not have any Female characters because Women weren't allowed to fight in Medieval times IIRC.

[BRSxIgnition]

6-9 LGBT characters out of a 30-35 character roster is realistic? That's over 25% of the characters.

I was originally thinking 3 - 6, it that balances things out more. Either way, only 2-3 would be locked out from the player in any one playthrough. Lesbians and Bi would work for Women and be, Gays and Bi would work for Men. Only Lesbians would be locked out for Men and only Gays would be locked out for women. Meaning max 2 - 3 in a single playthrough.

Really, if you want someone like Tharja that has the same supports regardless of your gender (minus the S-Support), then that is much more likely and reasonable. But 6-7 characters? That is bound to cause a lot of needless trouble.

I always disliked the way they handled Tharja's character. I got very excited when I saw the supports were the same, but crashed right back to earth when I saw that for some reason, the 'less natural' femalexfemale route couldn't end in an S.

Any way you work the numbers, a roster of 30-35 with 6-9 LGB characters means a minimum of about 17% LGB characters. If the argument you are trying to make involves fair representation then this is still a percentage that is about as far away from the current demographics of the Western world as the current 0% is.

There is a bit of a dilemma there, but I hardly think it would be as noticeable as you are stating. Depending on gender, only 2-3 would be locked out from romance in any one playthrough. That's less than LGBT players have been locked out of in the history of the series and in games in general.

I'm spiteful enough to skew your numbers with my vote, regardless of how I felt about the issue. In other words, don't use random internet polls to support your position.

I'd rather see someone who's bi - IIRC, they get shit on by quite a few people, and I think a well-written example of one would be amazing. Likewise, I wouldn't mind seeing someone who's asexual, simply because it forces zero marriages, and acknowledges the fact that some people just aren't interested, full stop. However, I don't have enough faith in the writers to do anything outside of straight without screwing it up horribly, which is why I won't support it until I feel that the writing team is strong enough for it. Perhaps I'll change my mind in the future.

That first sentence is - quite frankly - extremely rude and immature. And Regardless, it's not meant to support my position. I'm happy with the outcome, but I don't need any additional support from a random internet poll to know that all love is equal, regardless of gender.

I'm simply happy more people know that than the opposite here in Serenes Forest.

Regarding the rest of your post, I want them to treat the characters with respect first and foremost, but even if the writing for everyone is bad - like I've seen some people arguing it is in Awakening and such - I'd want them to include LGBT minorities, as it's the right thing to do.

Even if they're written as badly as all the straight characters. It would mean a lot to have them included.

Edited June 6, 2015 by BRSxIgnition

[ChibiToastExplosion]

They became second-nature in Awakening, children too. I think that's what they mean.

Exactly.

Supports have been handled tastefully in the past - GBA supports gave characters depth and helped you learn about them.

Supports were limited, though, which helped because you could write in-depth supports for a few characters rather than having to be worried about supporting with everyone or pandering them all to one specific unit. It worked in the past because it was small, and limited. It added to the game, rather than consume it.

Mystery was an amazing game and there was no sniff of support conversations at all. I'm not one of those who think Geneology was the high point in the series - the game before it was.

I'm a fan of the least amount of character dialogue as possible, because then you can insert your own flavor and personality in the game with imagination. This works in favor of whatever sexuality you want to impose. Oguma doesn't say much, and neither does Merric - want them to be gay? Imagination. Don't want them to pair? Imagination. I ended up caring more about the Akenia characters than the others in the series because I was able to create my own backstories and imprint myself on them. No reason that can't work again - less sometimes is more.

[NekoKnight]

I was originally thinking 3 - 6, it that balances things out more. Either way, only 2-3 would be locked out from the player in any one playthrough. Lesbians and Bi would work for Women and be, Gays and Bi would work for Men. Only Lesbians would be locked out for Men and only Gays would be locked out for women. Meaning max 2 - 3 in a single playthrough.

You said yourself that making everyone bi would be pandering, if not insulting? Gays apparently make up less than 10% of the population so to make upwards of 25% of the roster gay would be pandering to your interests, and not an accurate survey of people's orientations. I get you want a "fair" selection for dating, but if we're going to be honest, something like 3-4 gays total would be more appropriate.

There is not really a way to please everyone. You either keep things realistic and have only a few gay options, or you do things the Dragon Age way and you have way too many LGBT characters.

[Augestein]

I was originally thinking 3 - 6, it that balances things out more. Either way, only 2-3 would be locked out from the player in any one playthrough. Lesbians and Bi would work for Women and be, Gays and Bi would work for Men. Only Lesbians would be locked out for Men and only Gays would be locked out for women. Meaning max 2 - 3 in a single playthrough.

But it's still pretty bad though. People that want to be gay or lesbian have terrible choices in comparison to someone that isn't gay or lesbian. From a story perspective it makes sense, from a gameplay though? Terrible. It's almost like as a heterosexual you get a choice. As a homosexual, you have to settle. I don't think there should be any minimum. If 50% of the cast was gay because the writer thought that's how it should be, fine. If they aren't, that's fine too. Seeing as supports actually do something from a gameplay perspective, this is awful. Imagine if you will, that we have Awakening's cast, and we'll just say that the characters adopt to handle children issues. I'm now going to randomly select 3 men and 3 women:

Men: Basilio, Ricken, Stahl

Women: Sumia, Lissa, Panne.

Let's make you male Robin for this example.

Your options are incredibly limited now, and from a gameplay perspective, this hurts potential bonuses that you might get for pair up. With Basilio, you have to keep your purity until late game-- which means no supports past A until Basil comes, and it means that Robin will be childless for most of the game. That means to make Robin make use of an A support as a gay man, he has to settle for Ricken or Stahl while a straight Robin has the choices of Sully, Maribelle, Mirel, any of the female children, Nowi, Tharja... All of which join earlier than Basilio. So unless Basilio's support gives you untouchable godlike sources of power, there's no real point to supporting with him. It also means that gay Robins have significantly less options for his daughter. Granted she inherits all of the classes anyways, but she gets less choices for mods than straight male Robin, which has some unfortunate implications.

I always disliked the way they handled Tharja's character. I got very excited when I saw the supports were the same, but crashed right back to earth when I saw that for some reason, the 'less natural' femalexfemale route couldn't end in an S.

Because you couldn't S, or the nature of the support? How about Gregor then? Gregor is more willing to share the bed with male Robin than he is with female Robin initially. Or even Fem!Robin x Flavia. Fem!Robin thinks that Flavia wants to be lovers and she gets so flustered about it initially that she runs away blushing? And considering how Basilio and Male!Robin's go, you could take that has having homosexual undertones as well. And I think the thing with Awakening is that they don't want you to get screwed over. You have a baby with heterosexual characters and for homosexuals, they get... Nothing. Adopting wouldn't really work because of the nature of the game, and would require new characters for this to make any kind of sense and there would be even MORE supports with people.

There is a bit of a dilemma there, but I hardly think it would be as noticeable as you are stating. Depending on gender, only 2-3 would be locked out from romance in any one playthrough. That's less than LGBT players have been locked out of in the history of the series and in games in general.

And here's my issue with that: sexuality is something that is literally a character trait that doesn't even need to be brought up. We could simply ignore romance, and it really doesn't matter. Sexuality never appears because no one is showing interests in each other. The players can be what they want to be. I'd say sex and race and gender are even more of a problem than sexuality. For cripes sake, I can't even make a dark skinned Robin in Awakening, and my dad IS darker skinned in game!

My issue is that I don't WANT any type of character to be in the game. And neither should you, because there's no heart put into a character that's put in the game for the sake of having a character that's in the game. If they're going to be gay or lesbian or bi, I want it to be in the way that is Lyndis or Ike, if you think of them that way. Where if they are, it's like it's just there, and not that the character was MADE to be a homosexual character.

[MajorMajora]

Eh, love is love. I've never really been partial to gay ships, that's just personal preference and I see nothing wrong with them in there. And if they're well written I suppose that I'll like it.

[goodperson707]

Okay The playable cast of a Fire emblem game is not a perfect repersentive of the game worlds population (For example most FE games do not have 50-50 playable females, but that does not mean that there are more males than females in the fire emblem world) The everybody is bi thing is also a problem not only because because of realism, so saying that there is a higher percentage of playable LGB characters than whatever (possibly unreliable) studies have said is unrealistic is somewhat missing the point. Also it is not just about getting more dating options (at least for me) and i find that having a bit of a skewed percentage among the player characters, is better than getting accused of or being tokenism. If There was 3-4 there would be either no bi people or at least one of LGB would only have one playable character.

Also on those who are afraid of badly done LGB characters, there have been implied some quite heavily same sex pairings before in fire emblem, and at least some of those were well done in my opinion. But i would much prefer those be Canon rather than implied.

[BRSxIgnition]

You said yourself that making everyone bi would be pandering, if not insulting?

.... something like 3-4 gays total would be more appropriate....

There is not really a way to please everyone. You either keep things realistic and have only a few gay options, or you do things the Dragon Age way and you have way too many LGBT characters.

I'd be fine with 3-4 LGBT characters. I'd be fine with 1 character.

As long as there's representation and selection for LGBT players, it's a step in the right direction, and one that Nintendo has promised it would make.

With 1 Gay, 1 Lesbian, and 1 or 2 Bisexual characters - just like Valkyria Chronicles, oddly enough (1 of each) - it'd have the options open to the player, while not locking out more than 1 character romance per gender. It would also remain realistic according to current statistics.

Would THAT be an admirable compromise? (It's certainly better than the Dragon Age option...)

But it's still pretty bad though. People that want to be gay or lesbian have terrible choices in comparison to someone that isn't gay or lesbian. From a story perspective it makes sense, from a gameplay though? Terrible. It's almost like as a heterosexual you get a choice. As a homosexual, you have to settle. I don't think there should be any minimum. If 50% of the cast was gay because the writer thought that's how it should be, fine. If they aren't, that's fine too. Seeing as supports actually do something from a gameplay perspective, this is awful. Imagine if you will, that we have Awakening's cast, and we'll just say that the characters adopt to handle children issues.

... *Snip*

My issue is that I don't WANT any type of character to be in the game. And neither should you, because there's no heart put into a character that's put in the game for the sake of having a character that's in the game. If they're going to be gay or lesbian or bi, I want it to be in the way that is Lyndis or Ike, if you think of them that way. Where if they are, it's like it's just there, and not that the character was MADE to be a homosexual character.

Thing is, I'm not wanting LGBT character just for them to show up, say "I'm Gay!" then leave.

No.

I'm saying I want them because straight players have gotten nothing but good characters and canon supports. Why can LGBT players not get a few good characters who they can identify with just as well? This goes for skin color and other features too (as long as it works with the setting.) Legend of Korra of all things used this well, having people from all skin tones and even one woman with no arms as a major character.

I'm not saying "Fire Emblem: If" needs to go that far, but would it be so bad if there were 1 Gay, 1 Lesbian, and 1 or 2 Bisexual characters on the roster? It's a feature we want for some of the characters; NOT all we want the characters to be.

Edited June 6, 2015 by BRSxIgnition

[Thor Odinson]

I can't say the fears are unfounded for the people who are worried about stereotyping based on both heather's portrayal (I also heard some stuff about Kyza? I'm not well versed enough in RD to really say) and also just the overall writing quality of FEA. I hope that, should the writer of if be actually up to the task, to include some simply because people do exist, but just write them as regular people who happen to prefer whatever gender(s) they're into. I'd rather not have another Heather.

To handle avatar (in case of near-unlimited marriage pool) , the avatar could be the one that's programmatically bi, and have options to S support all the character that are capable of being attracted to them. The player chooses what they play avatar as. For example, M Avatar would get like 15F and 3M (randomly pulling out numbers here, population percentages are more likely to display higher variance at small population sizes), the player will then have the option of pairing their Avatar with any of the people in his pool.

[BRSxIgnition]

I can't say the fears are unfounded for the people who are worried about stereotyping based on both heather's portrayal (I also heard some stuff about Kyza? I'm not well versed enough in RD to really say) and also just the overall writing quality of FEA. I hope that, should the writer of if be actually up to the task, to include some simply because people do exist, but just write them as regular people who happen to prefer whatever gender(s) they're into. I'd rather not have another Heather.

To handle avatar (in case of near-unlimited marriage pool) , the avatar could be the one that's programmatically bi, and have options to S support all the character that are capable of being attracted to them. The player chooses what they play avatar as. For example, M Avatar would get like 15F and 3M (randomly pulling out numbers here, population percentages are more likely to display higher variance at small population sizes), the player will then have the option of pairing their Avatar with any of the people in his pool.

First Paragraph: That's what I mean by the last bolded line in my previous post. We want well rounded characters who happen to be LGBT. That doesn't need to be their entirety, and in a perfect world, it wouldn't be.

Second Paragraph: I wish I could have explained it so concisely - thank you very much for that. That would be perfect.

[BluCommander]

I would like it if IF returned back to each character only having supports with a handful of other characters (with the exception of Kamui, who should be able to support with everyone). I think it would make a lot of sense to have a 2-6 LGB characters who can romance 2 or 3 other characters that are gay or bi. I'd like it if they could still have platonic supports with those of the same and opposite gender as well. Kamui's sexuality would obviously be left up to the player.

If IF returns to how Awakening was with supports where anyone can support just about anyone else I would rather see LGB excluded. I just don't trust IS with handling so many supports and not fucking up the LGB characters, I don't want to have another Heather character on our hands. I thought characters like Soren in the past were handled pretty well, and I think IS could improve on that, given that each character had less, but better written, supports.

[Aethin]

To all those who have asked for an elaboration, here you go. The paragraphs are spoilered to save space, but should be read in order.

[spoiler=Marriage and Sex]Human sexuality is inseparable from marriage (that is, the sacrament of marriage, not "civil unions"). Its purpose is twofold: to unite man and wife as one body, and to enable married couples to participate in the act of creation in making more humans. This is the foundation of human sexuality. The couple must also be open to parenthood, as all married people are--very often literal parenthood, but in this case more generally meaning a vocation to instruct the next generation(s) and pass on the faith to them. Marriage is a divinely sanctioned sacrament that is unchangeably focused on this spiritual parenthood.

In this way, even infertile married couples are--when fulfilling their duties--parents and are not objectionable.

[spoiler=Couldn't find a good spot to put these part, but here is good]Romantic relationships serve the purpose of helping someone find a suitable spouse. It is irresponsible and immoral to stay in a relationship with someone you have no intent to marry; remaining in that relationship would be using the other person--essentially hedonism. In this way, romance and marriage are inextricably linked.

Someone asked about homosexual animals like bonobos or some penguins. Non-human animals cannot be held to moral standards because animals have not been gifted with rational souls capable of understanding morality.

[spoiler=Final Point]All science points to homosexuality as being an inborn trait (save for in those cases few and far between where someone late in life abandons opposite-sex attraction, often because of abuse). Humans can't be held accountable for such things completely out of their control, and so simply being homosexual cannot be a sin. However, homosexual relationships go against the foundations of human sexuality in that

same-sex couples cannot be married (despite any "civil marriages" sanctioned by governments), and

same-sex couples cannot form the proper "parental unit," which by divine order must be a husband and wife, and thus can never be spiritual parents in any sense, REGARDLESS of their ability to raise adopted children to adulthood.

Edited June 6, 2015 by Aethin

[Asinine Knave]

One of the major complaints regarding Awakening was that there were no same-sex romances even though plot wise it's definitely justifiable to some extent. That controversy, combined with the Tomodachi Life backlash makes me think it would be pretty criminal to bring back the romantic S supports and NOT include some LGBT ones. I know gay marriage isn't legal in Japan, but plenty of other Japanese games and media have included "yuri/yaoi" content. This is a good opportunity for Nintendo to show that they mean it when they intend to be more inclusive of everyone in their games. I definitely don't see future children returning, nor should it as it was a plot point of Awakening that likely would make no sense here in If's plot. I also would prefer if the characters didn't "marry." You can still get your fill of cheesy romance without having your characters actually get hitched. If we want to talk realism, the vast majority of Awakening's supports went from good friends to newlyweds in a ridiculously forced way. When characters reach an S support, they should just be listed as "companion" or "significant other."

The big question is how they should approach it. Fire Emblem games feature huge casts of characters, and if they try to make the majority of characters romanceable with each other, then that's going to leave a ton of possibilities, but you have to wonder if quality of the writing will be sacrified for quantity. In that sense, I think it'd be a better move if each character had their own pool of potential love interests. Some character might only be able to romance the opposite sex, some only of the same sex, and others either both sexes or neither. Of course, this would make certain pairings impossible, and I think a lot of players just want the freedom to play matchmaker with no restraints. I realize that making every character bi is not a realistic approach per se, but in the context of a game where YOU choose who ends up with who, does it really matter? If we look past sexual orientations or mere labelings and just look at it from a love is love standpoint, or even as a game where you decide the fate of each character, it's not much more different than Awakening allowing characters to have a large pool or romanceable units. You have to wonder how many of those relationships would actually pan out to begin with. The "make everyone bi" option leaves all of the many possiblities in the player's hands. It also gives a much better probability of LGBT representation being more naturally woven into the characters' support conversations than having a select few token gays who will most likely be flanderized and/or negatively stereotyped.

I'm pretty conflicted as to how I'd like LGBT supports to pan out, but as long as the system is a step-up from Awakening, (gay options or not) I'll be fairly content.

[goodperson707]

To those who bring up Heather i would say she is hardly the greatest example, as she is introduced in a game without supports so if they wanted to make her les they had to do it in the amount of lines she had. And yes wanting to make somebody les just because is not good but i wonder if having a heavily implied nearly canon gay character in the game, forced their hand.

[Aethin]

This is a very dangerous statement.

I just realized that I forgot to address this!

I can definitely see how it could be seen that way, given they way I phrased it. Here's a second attempt:

It is our responsibility to instruct and advise others as to the correct morals. You cannot truly force someone to convert or reform, and it is immoral to try, but everyone should be informed of the truth (regardless of whether they believe it or not).

EDIT: I seem to be getting a tad off-topic from the thread. If anyone wants to further chat about stuff, feel free to PM me about it.

Edited June 6, 2015 by Aethin

[Thor Odinson]

To those who bring up Heather i would say she is hardly the greatest example, as she is introduced in a game without supports so if they wanted to make her les they had to do it in the amount of lines she had. And yes wanting to make somebody les just because is not good but i wonder if having a heavily implied nearly canon gay character in the game, forced their hand.

Not an excuse. FE4 had characters who are interesting with just their introductory lines, sometimes a bit more (Levin and Ayra, for example). FE10 at least had base conversations and FE4 didn't even have that. Sometimes it's not about the quantity of lines, but the quality. 3 sentences can say a lot about a character if you pull it off well.

The point is not people not wanting LGBT characters in general, but given IS's track record, their fears are not unfounded. It's not about whether or not it's possible to write a good character who happens to be gay; It's whether or not IS's writers are up to that task. In theory writing a good character who happens to be gay should be about as difficult as writing a good character who happens to be straight, but in practice a lot of people struggle with it and end up writing stereotypes, for some reason.

[goodperson707]

^ well yes but, they are still not all of them are done well Plus if a guy had heathers character i am not sure if there would be a problem. The only real difference i can tell is her conversation with Brom. Actually most of the things she says sound like most of the skirt chasers that are in FE, actually she seems to have more depth than most of them.

[Thor Odinson]

I can't speak for everyone but I also personally disliked most of the skirtchaser characters in FE. Obviously the perception of characters differ by the individual, but a bad character is a bad character.

The point is not all of FE4's characters are well done; a significant number aren't, and FE4's characters are by no means perfect. But the fact they did manage to flesh out Levin and Ayra's characters without support or base conversations means it is possible to do so.

3 lines of Ayra's join conversation and I was sold. FE4 didn't do a good job with everyone, but it sure as fuck did a good job on her.

Edited June 6, 2015 by Thor Odinson

[Dark Holy Elf]

I'm not a fan of skirt-chaser characters either on average but eh, I don't mind their existence. Some people pretty much do act like that. And occasionally they get some pretty fun scenes (tree in a skirt, etc.).

I can't agree with people saying that we would be better served to have no LGBT characters at all because they might be written badly. That attitude just gives the writers a (cowardly) excuse not to write them. I'd much rather see an attempt. If it's bad, okay, I'll be on board with the rest of you complaining that is bad. But I'd rather see the attempt anyway. The more examples of such characters we get, good or bad, the more future writers can learn from the previous examples. I don't think homosexuality should be regarded as so "special" that it is treated as something which only proven "good" writers should be allowed to write about.

[Chiki]

Someone asked about homosexual animals like bonobos or some penguins. Non-human animals cannot be held to moral standards because animals have not been gifted with rational souls capable of understanding morality.

The point wasn't brought up because I was trying to "blame" them for being gay. The point was that this is proof that homosexuality is biological precisely because, as you point out, non-human animals aren't rational and can't choose to be gay.

ll science points to homosexuality as being an inborn trait (save for in those cases few and far between where someone late in life abandons opposite-sex attraction, often because of abuse). Humans can't be held accountable for such things completely out of their control, and so simply being homosexual cannot be a sin. However, homosexual relationships go against the foundations of human sexuality in that

same-sex couples cannot be married (despite any "civil marriages" sanctioned by governments), and

same-sex couples cannot form the proper "parental unit," which by divine order must be a husband and wife, and thus can never be spiritual parents in any sense, REGARDLESS of their ability to raise adopted children to adulthood.

Agreed, humans can't be held accountable for being gay. Humans also can't be held accountable for wanting to have sex and be together with the person they love. Also, gays shouldn't be forced to be together with people of the opposite sex if they don't want to.

God has made gay people who want to have sex. He has created them himself. Why would he create them if he didn't want them to go have gay relationships?

If God made them gay and desire relationships, knowingly dooming gay people to a life of loneliness because gay relationships are banned, then it's God's fault and he is a fucking dick for doing so. It's the same reason why God is a dick for creating people with cystic fibrosis, and other diseases.

Thus, there's no reason why gay relationships shouldn't be in FE:if.

[goodperson707]

I can't speak for everyone but I also personally disliked most of the skirtchaser characters in FE. Obviously the perception of characters differ by the individual, but a bad character is a bad character.

The point is not all of FE4's characters are well done; a significant number aren't, and FE4's characters are by no means perfect. But the fact they did manage to flesh out Levin and Ayra's characters without support or base conversations means it is possible to do so.

3 lines of Ayra's join conversation and I was sold. FE4 didn't do a good job with everyone, but it sure as fuck did a good job on her.

Well yes of course but that doesn't change the fact that IS has them and that Heather is pretty much just a female version of that with the money for others (like castor, dorcas, ect) angle as well (aside from broms talk convo). If she is bit of a flat character it doesn't have much to do with her Les status imo. But on that now that i think about heather again it I kind of like that the money for others type is an other unit rather than an enemy.

Also on Arya, what sticks with you depends on you, and i would say some character traits are easier to convey with less text than others

Edited June 6, 2015 by goodperson707