Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Jackrabbit]

Oh.

Oh wow.

That's awesome, unless you somehow mistook the consorts gender. This is probably a bug, but I hope it's never fixed.

[Doomduckie]

I swear I can remember Toady talking about having the personality traits (which appear to follow a less-steep imitation of a bell curve distribution divided into a few categories) slotting well into the Kinsey Scale when someone suggested homosexuality. Perhaps it was discussed even because of this bug, which I am certain I have seen at least once more than this. If I'm imagining this, it's an oddly specific remembrance to be remembered.

Obviously though you'd want to make sexual orientation work off of personality traits than rather be a random bug, since then you can tie things into it and make the game actually recognize it and work off of it- culture (certain cultures should left-shift, right-shift, central shift, or outward shift the normal distribution based upon what their culture encourages), for instance. For example, the greeks and romans would have both edges of the curve pushed inwards, to make it more central (and thus medial heteronormativity trait being more likely), for one of the easiest examples.

[Jackrabbit]

It's a great idea, and I can't wait to see if it'll be implemented in the form of tolerance, riots and little factions in your fortress vying for gay rights.

Although Toady probably isn't heading in that direction.

[Doomduckie]

That'd be kind of silly. Projecting a modern perspective back on the past ("rights", riots, organised minority groups) would make dwarf fortress very anachronistic.

What you'd instead want is an overall picture of how a culture regards homosexuality as a way to help envision how a culture considers love and romance and interpersonal relationships- paederasty, warrior comradeship, Sappho, etc. all immediately come to mind in the ancient Mediterranean. You'd also want each dwarf to have an individual identity for the same reason that you want individual dwarves to have preferences for what type of rock or items they like, to give them personalities and uniqueness.

You know, things that made the Sacred Band of Thebes, the poetry of Sappho and Catullus, the Romans, the Greeks, just for a little few hundred mile area of ancient history that I know of. Those all deserve to go into the sort of 'past stew' that dwarf fortress's setting is.

[Cthulhu]

Anyway, you guys are looking up the wrong thing.  A consort, yeah, but this is a royal consort.  As in, the noble's spouse.

[Deon]

Pics or it did not happen. Also, save . I want to look at it.

[Neonivek]

Projecting a modern perspective back on the past ("rights", riots, organised minority groups) would make dwarf fortress very anachronistic

I find this statement very hillarious compared to the overwhelming use of projecting the present onto the past.

Heck, history is taught exactly as if everyone knew how the future would turn out.

[Deon]

I know. We will die. Someday.

[Retro]

It's a great idea, and I can't wait to see if it'll be implemented in the form of tolerance, riots and little factions in your fortress vying for gay rights.

Although Toady probably isn't heading in that direction.

That'd be kind of silly. Projecting a modern perspective back on the past ("rights", riots, organised minority groups) would make dwarf fortress very anachronistic.

What you'd instead want is an overall picture of how a culture regards homosexuality as a way to help envision how a culture considers love and romance and interpersonal relationships- paederasty, warrior comradeship, Sappho, etc. all immediately come to mind in the ancient Mediterranean. You'd also want each dwarf to have an individual identity for the same reason that you want individual dwarves to have preferences for what type of rock or items they like, to give them personalities and uniqueness.

You know, things that made the Sacred Band of Thebes, the poetry of Sappho and Catullus, etc. Those all deserve to go into the sort of 'past stew' that dwarf fortress is. For one, even though plate armour and the like exist, Dwarf Fortress isn't an exact copy of the High Middle Ages, so it'd be rather shocking to assume universal intolerance among every single culture even if we assume automatically that, due to ancient fantasy tradition, that most of the Entities are psuedo-western.

Agreed, and good call on bringing up the ancient Mediterranean. Modern views on the hypothetical past in regards to homosexuality/homophobia are especially odd when you consider that prior to the modern era, homosexuality was just as normal as heterosexuality. Homophobia is really only a relatively recent concept.

[smjjames]

Seriously people, this is just a bug which was suppousedly fixed a long time ago.

@the OP: What version do you have?

[Doomduckie]

Projecting a modern perspective back on the past ("rights", riots, organised minority groups) would make dwarf fortress very anachronistic

I find this statement very hillarious compared to the overwhelming use of projecting the present onto the past.

Heck, history is taught exactly as if everyone knew how the future would turn out.

That does kind of bug me. For instance, the 'inevitability' of losing a war for one side argument always annoys me, like how it was "Inevitable" in the US Civil War that the southern states would lose due to economic factors or that the defeat of so and so was inevitable. It's real easy with hindsight and stuff to make those proclamations, but I'm sure if the northern region of the US lost we'd be hearing "Southern officer corps advantages made it inevitable" or whatever.

But on topic- it's somewhat silly, especially given that the impetus probably wouldn't exist. Even if we acknowledge that due to long-standing fantasy convention that most cultures in DF worlds will be psuedowestern with plate armour and dukes and the like, realistically without the long chain of events that happened in our world there's no logical reason for intolerance to happen except as a cultural quirk. Cultural Quirks are neat ("They have a strong code of honour and feel hiding one's face is cowardly- their helms never have faceplates and they never wear masks or assassinate people"*) but shouldn't be overused or overly applied.

Intolerance of gays** in dwarf fortress would be as odd as seeing dwarven archbishops- while the specific contours of armour and weapons and technology and stuff in "Ye Olde Past" seem logical, something just strikes me as wrong and odd for the same idea as DF having a Catholic Church or making it illegal for dwarves to bake their own bread (which actually was true in some areas and times in the middle ages, incidentally)- laws, culture, and religion and the like, is what I appear to mean.

*This is a really cool cultural quirk in my opinion and I hope some day to go on a killing spree in adventure mode face-shooting this culture.
**Again, the concept of such an identity per se is kind of anachronistic but a bit unavoidable when trying to talk in the modern day.

[Jay]

I'm thinking the "duke" is female.
Reverse drag queen?

[Neonivek]

Well the problem is that intollerance is a lot more of a modern concept.

[Shurhaian]

There's nothing to keep a specific society from being intolerant of homosexual relationships, though. It could be an ethic.

That said, it'd be more sensible once there's more than one relationship per dwarf. The upper nobility(i.e. baron and upward) would be under immense pressure to carry on the lineage; they would have an official consort who is to provide them with babies even if they have a same-sex lover that's their "primary"(the one they actually want to talk to when upset, say).

But leaving all that aside - seconding the requests for A) screenshots and B) game version.

[Akigagak]

Well the problem is that intollerance is a lot more of a modern concept.

Hah. Really?

I must be wrong on nearly a thousand years of history.