S Supports ruin gay characters

[Jotari]

My premise. So long as we have S supports and an Avatar, the series will never have any gay characters. We could be floating in bi characters, but the idea of being able to pair a character with multiple units and especially being able to pair with the avatar means characters just can't be gay. The choices are limited to not pairing them with anyone at all except the avatar in a single gender, or creating two or three gay characters of the same gender that can only pair with each other. Neither of these options are preferable to just making a character bi in the first and giving them multiple units to S Support. I guess the other option would be to give use a Louise-Pent pair who are already in a relationship, which would be the best option, but having a pair of characters that the lord can't S support at all is rather unthinkable in this day and age. I think it's telling the only actual gay characters we've seen in Fire Emblem have been Heather and Leon, both from games without S supports (unless there is someone from Three Houses/Fates who's only exclusive to one gender of the avatar that I'm over looking).

[AnonymousSpeed]

itt Jotari asserts that homosexuals are incapable of steady monogamous relationships

[Florete]

Can't ruin gay characters if you never had them in the first place (yes, I know about Heather and Leon).

The solution to this is actually surprisingly simple, but will never happen in a Fire Emblem game: make half the cast bi, spread straights and gays among the rest, pair up appropriately.

[lenticular]

Anoher option is to move away from the idea that S supports always have to mean romantic relationships. In Three Houses, that's what they did with Alois and Gilbert, two characters who are canonically already married (not to each other). And while the implementation in Three Houses was pretty terrible, since it wasn't made clear beforehand that this was going to happen leading to a lot of players feeling misled by the game, I think that the idea is sound. A close friendship can be deep and meaningful and as worthy of an S support as a romance, and I like the idea of that sort of friendship being celebrated in FE games rather than romance always being placed on a pinnacle.

Ultimately: If Intelligent Systems wanted to have more gay characters in the game, they would find a way to do it. It might create a few problems or require changing how a few things work but there is no inherent insurmountable problem that means gay characters are impossible. That we don't have them is because IS don't want to add them.

[Jotari]

8 hours ago, AnonymousSpeed said:

itt Jotari asserts that homosexuals are incapable of steady monogamous relationships

I don't feel like that's what I said at all but damning in won't fight for you're right to assert that I did!

5 hours ago, lenticular said:

Anoher option is to move away from the idea that S supports always have to mean romantic relationships. In Three Houses, that's what they did with Alois and Gilbert, two characters who are canonically already married (not to each other). And while the implementation in Three Houses was pretty terrible, since it wasn't made clear beforehand that this was going to happen leading to a lot of players feeling misled by the game, I think that the idea is sound. A close friendship can be deep and meaningful and as worthy of an S support as a romance, and I like the idea of that sort of friendship being celebrated in FE games rather than romance always being placed on a pinnacle.

Ultimately: If Intelligent Systems wanted to have more gay characters in the game, they would find a way to do it. It might create a few problems or require changing how a few things work but there is no inherent insurmountable problem that means gay characters are impossible. That we don't have them is because IS don't want to add them.

I consider myself asexual so platonic supports ftw, I just don't see that being the predominant way in which IS is likely to handle the majority of S supports from here on out.

[Dark Holy Elf]

I don't see how the 3H system precludes gay characters. In fact, here's how Linhardt or Dorothea or Yuri or whoever could have been gay, in two easy steps:

-Remove them from the list of S supports for opposite-sex Byleth.

-Change their endings with any opposite-sex characters to be non-romantic.

 

IMO, the only reason they don't do this is because they're cowardly and there's an expectation from some part of the (straight) fanbase that any opposite-sex character is available to be romanced. I personally think this is a pretty damaging idea even independent of representation of sexuality (and I'd also argue it hurt Fates). Fortunately, as @lenticular mentioned, they did take baby steps away from this with Alois and Gilbert.

Now, a system in which all the characters are expected to pair up romantically as a gameplay mechanic (i.e. Genealogy, Awakening, Fates) does make it tougher to have purely gay characters, though still not impossible; Chrom and Sumia have shown us that it's possible for a character to have a much smaller S support pool, and that's probably what a gay character would look like in those games too (being only able to romance other gay or bi characters).

[lenticular]

1 minute ago, Jotari said:

I consider myself asexual so platonic supports ftw, I just don't see that being the predominant way in which IS is likely to handle the majority of S supports from here on out.

I also don't consider it likely, no matter how much I would like to see it. But my point was that it's a viable option and that IS are keeping S supports as being primarily opposite-sex romantic relationships because that is their choice, not because of anything inherent to the system that means they can't change it.

[Jotari]

5 minutes ago, lenticular said:

I also don't consider it likely, no matter how much I would like to see it. But my point was that it's a viable option and that IS are keeping S supports as being primarily opposite-sex romantic relationships because that is their choice, not because of anything inherent to the system that means they can't change it.

Well we have two systems in place here. One is the physical what is possible system (to which the answer is absolutely anything ( and the other is the fiscal reality, to which I assert bi characters are far more profitable/palatable than exclusively gay characters. As I outlined the in the OP, there are ways in which they could feature gay characters in the current system. It's just highly unlikely they will.

Edited August 15, 2020 by Jotari

[Shanty Pete's 1st Mate]

You're probably right, unfortunately. I've said it before, but my ideal game would have people of all sexualities - straight, gay, bi, ace, etc. It would have characters who are already married, and ones who choose not to marry.

In theory, this could be viable with the Three Houses scheme - allow the Avatar to S-rank anyone, but only make it romantic if they're compatible, and platonic otherwise. If a character is already married, the S-rank can be "they start a business together". If a character is too young to marry, it can be "Avatar became like a parent to them". It'll take a lot of work, though, to make the S-rank vary with different genders of Byleth.

Alternatively, just revert to S-ranks being explicitly romantic, and limit them so you can't S-rank everyone. Less work, but you get the inevitable "why can't I romance character X" complaints. So I don't know what will work best.

[Light Strategist]

2 hours ago, Dark Holy Elf said:

I don't see how the 3H system precludes gay characters. In fact, here's how Linhardt or Dorothea or Yuri or whoever could have been gay, in two easy steps:

-Remove them from the list of S supports for opposite-sex Byleth.

-Change their endings with any opposite-sex characters to be non-romantic.

The same can be said with Niles and Rhajat too!

[Zapp Branniglenn]

I want to say people would appreciate better defined sexuality in a Fire Emblem game but I saw the outrage at the lack of Claude S support for male byleth. When people start to think IS "owes" us a gay support with a character, it's clear we're not mature enough to handle anything better than they're willing to write. And what they're willing to write is probably very little to begin with. Japanese culture is many years behind western culture in LGBT rights and their representation in media is still typically just the setup for stereotyped jokes about queer behaviors. I won't make generalizations regarding a collection of writers I don't personally know, but I'm certain they understand the potential for backlash with those sorts of character depictions that aren't derogatory. Bisexuality is easier to swallow than same-sex relationships, if you're the sort of person that has any objections to non-normative sexualities to begin with. And in modern fire emblem, the same sex S supports are outnumbered by the heterosexual ones to the point you could just call them easter eggs

[X-Naut]

I don't agree with the title but I do agree with the notion that Avatar marriage is stifling LGBT rep in Fire Emblem. Nothing directly stops them, but as long as player characters can marry others there's going to be precedent to "not leave out" anyone from the pool. I'm going to need to see larger steps than Three Houses did in the other direction to be fully convinced. Otherwise the best bet would be to have a chaste Avatar character like FE12 Kris, where all their ship teasy supports ring hollow in the end.

[Samz707]

1 hour ago, Glennstavos said:

I want to say people would appreciate better defined sexuality in a Fire Emblem game but I saw the outrage at the lack of Claude S support for male byleth. When people start to think IS "owes" us a gay support with a character, it's clear we're not mature enough to handle anything better than they're willing to write. And what they're willing to write is probably very little to begin with. Japanese culture is many years behind western culture in LGBT rights and their representation in media is still typically just the setup for stereotyped jokes about queer behaviors. I won't make generalizations regarding a collection of writers I don't personally know, but I'm certain they understand the potential for backlash with those sorts of character depictions that aren't derogatory. Bisexuality is easier to swallow than same-sex relationships, if you're the sort of person that has any objections to non-normative sexualities to begin with. And in modern fire emblem, the same sex S supports are outnumbered by the heterosexual ones to the point you could just call them easter eggs

From what I gathered, wasn't it more because Claude still acts super flirty with you if you're male? so he still acts flirty but you still couldn't S-support him despite a good bit of the flirty dialogue for Female Byleth still being used, so it was weird how he was still flirty with a male Byleth but not romancable. (apparently, not interacting that much with Claude on my playthrough and I'm a woman anyway in my playthrough.)

I do sorta agree that self-insert characters in fiction tend to maybe result sometimes in an "Everyone is Bi" trope, since player choice tends to sometimes be emphasised over basic logic. (Which is why I kinda like the few times games, such as the Text Adventure Fallen Hero, have a gay character who is not possible to romance if you're female.)

 

Edited August 15, 2020 by Samz707

[Dandy Druid]

1 hour ago, Glennstavos said:

I want to say people would appreciate better defined sexuality in a Fire Emblem game but I saw the outrage at the lack of Claude S support for male byleth. When people start to think IS "owes" us a gay support with a character, it's clear we're not mature enough to handle anything better than they're willing to write. And what they're willing to write is probably very little to begin with. Japanese culture is many years behind western culture in LGBT rights and their representation in media is still typically just the setup for stereotyped jokes about queer behaviors. I won't make generalizations regarding a collection of writers I don't personally know, but I'm certain they understand the potential for backlash with those sorts of character depictions that aren't derogatory. Bisexuality is easier to swallow than same-sex relationships, if you're the sort of person that has any objections to non-normative sexualities to begin with. And in modern fire emblem, the same sex S supports are outnumbered by the heterosexual ones to the point you could just call them easter eggs

The only reason people were mad at Claude not being a bi option was because a reviewer heavily implied that he was a gay option in order to get more clicks for their blog. So it got everyone's hopes up that he was going to be bi when in reality, he isn't (unless you see his Lorenz ending as romantic, which I don't.) The outrage really wasn't over his sexuality, it was the misleading information about Bylad's ability to court him. Yes, there's probably people not mature enough to handle what's written, but a good portion of the outrage was over that blog.

Onto the topic at hand, as a member of the LGBT+ community it's important to be represented. Three Houses did a good job at expanding same sex relationships (albeit, the male ssr were always written vaguely). My only hope is that IS hires a writer that identifies as LGBT so the supports sound more natural. Of course, this isn't really doable since LGBT+ people still face a big stigma when it comes to employment.

[lenticular]

1 hour ago, Dandy Druid said:

Onto the topic at hand, as a member of the LGBT+ community it's important to be represented. Three Houses did a good job at expanding same sex relationships (albeit, the male ssr were always written vaguely). My only hope is that IS hires a writer that identifies as LGBT so the supports sound more natural.

In Three Houses, it helped out a ton that Dorothea's English voice actor (Allegra Clark) is a bisexual woman herself. She rocked that performance, and made Dorothea feel more real than I suspect she would have done otherwise.

[Ricey]

Give us gays or give us death.

[Jotari]

8 hours ago, Glennstavos said:

I want to say people would appreciate better defined sexuality in a Fire Emblem game but I saw the outrage at the lack of Claude S support for male byleth. When people start to think IS "owes" us a gay support with a character, it's clear we're not mature enough to handle anything better than they're willing to write. And what they're willing to write is probably very little to begin with. Japanese culture is many years behind western culture in LGBT rights and their representation in media is still typically just the setup for stereotyped jokes about queer behaviors. I won't make generalizations regarding a collection of writers I don't personally know, but I'm certain they understand the potential for backlash with those sorts of character depictions that aren't derogatory. Bisexuality is easier to swallow than same-sex relationships, if you're the sort of person that has any objections to non-normative sexualities to begin with. And in modern fire emblem, the same sex S supports are outnumbered by the heterosexual ones to the point you could just call them easter eggs

And fetishes. Japan's fetish game is lightyears ahead of anyone else's.

 

6 hours ago, Samz707 said:

From what I gathered, wasn't it more because Claude still acts super flirty with you if you're male? so he still acts flirty but you still couldn't S-support him despite a good bit of the flirty dialogue for Female Byleth still being used, so it was weird how he was still flirty with a male Byleth but not romancable. (apparently, not interacting that much with Claude on my playthrough and I'm a woman anyway in my playthrough.)

I do sorta agree that self-insert characters in fiction tend to maybe result sometimes in an "Everyone is Bi" trope, since player choice tends to sometimes be emphasised over basic logic. (Which is why I kinda like the few times games, such as the Text Adventure Fallen Hero, have a gay character who is not possible to romance if you're female.)

 

Funny thing is Claude's S support with female Byleth takes a swerve and seems entirely platonic at the last moment with the ending not referencing marriage or anything (instead talking about what sounds like what should be a really major plot point that's only addressed there).

Edited August 16, 2020 by Jotari

[Sir Gerwald of Vallora]

I disagree. Just have some characters that can't be S supported by the opposite sex. It's not hard, and if Nintendo wants to commit to it then they will. S supports don't ruin the chances, if anything, it's Nintendo/IS.

 

[King Marth 64]

14 hours ago, Jotari said:

Well we have two systems in place here. One is the physical what is possible system (to which the answer is absolutely anything ( and the other is the fiscal reality, to which I assert bi characters are far more profitable/palatable than exclusively gay characters. As I outlined the in the OP, there are ways in which they could feature gay characters in the current system. It's just highly unlikely they will.

It depends on their characters' personalities, I definitely think it might work on some of the new characters for strange reasons. There's definitely some players do wanted LGTB relationships since Fates added it in when they support who to who depending on which units that they want to marry in the same gender. I never expected Three Houses when they first releases managed to add more same Gender S Supports for multiple characters instead of just pick two characters like in Fates.

Edited August 16, 2020 by King Marth 64

[Dandy Druid]

12 hours ago, lenticular said:

In Three Houses, it helped out a ton that Dorothea's English voice actor (Allegra Clark) is a bisexual woman herself. She rocked that performance, and made Dorothea feel more real than I suspect she would have done otherwise.

I have no doubt that no one could've done Dorothea (and Shamir) better. Allegra fully understood the character and related to her.

[LightingChaos]

yo remember A+ supports in fates that didn't have any dialogue.

me too

[corrinbutgay]

i feel like the only gay character is the player character because imo i think that you can make them straight, gay, bi, ace, pan, whatever.

[Axie]

i wouldn't mind the avatar being able to marry anyone in the game if some characters were just otherwise gay or even actually bi outside the avatar

"straight except the avatar" is still straight to me the avatar doesn't count it's kind of a cop out lol

we aren't getting that any time soon though so no use worrying about it

[flatdog]

if intsys wanted to make explicitly gay characters (gay, not bi), whose sexuality was actually a part of their character--for example, when it came to their backstory and past relationships and how it affected them and made them become who they are in the present,--then yeah, they'd have to restrict s support for the avatar and probably get mixed feedback about it. i don't think they're going to do that any time soon though

so far i've only played awakening, fates and 3h, but to me it doesn't seem like sexuality of characters matters at all in fe, with maybe a few exceptions like sylvain whose entire personality seems to be that he's a skirt chaser. funnily enough, i headcanon him as bi

personally, i think everyone should be technically bi and romanceable, if not between each other (because there'd be twice as many s supports to write) then at least with the avatar. let's take any character, for example frederick. as far as i know, the game never mentions anything about his attraction to other people. so if you romance him as f!robin, is he straight? what if you were able to romance him as m!robin? would he be gay then? or what if he's bi in both cases? it all just comes down to the way you headcanon him. if you see him as straight, then he's straight. if you see him as gay, then he's gay. same with many, many others, whose sexuality isn't once discussed in an explicit way. and i don't mean a guy blushing when talking to a girl, because even then he still might be bi. you see what i'm getting at?