The whole 'gay, bisexual, straight' thing is way overplayed in common culture, especially Western culture. There's an unspoken assumption even among the gay community that gayness must be True Gayness with no exception, heterosexuality must be True Hetero with no exception, and bisexuals must be sex maniacs who are attracted to everyone.

The truth probably falls more along the lines of something like the Kinsey Scale where most people could probably find someone of the opposite or same sex they were attracted to if they allowed themselves to. (See Ancient Greece). It's just that society, especially Christian-influenced society, tends to make it much easier for those who lean toward heterosexuality and could is a hell of a long way from will or especially should.
 
Last edited:
Look, I don't support the guy because I want more agency but making out sleeping with the ceremonial wives as some kind of deep moral failing is a bit silly. It's clear their position is a polite fiction, one aimed at outsiders yet.
Except at the same time, compromising that fiction for a quick lay isn't doing anyone any favors. He wanted a fumble in the hay? Than he shouldn't have done it to a bunch of political wives and risk the blowback staining his mother's reputation.

You know what, lets settle this once and for all so I don't have to deal with morons accusing me of being a horrible person for decrying the boy. @Academia Nut, how would both the People and the civilizations that married Magwyna react to publicly finding out her son has been sleeping around with her wives, fiction or no?
 
hell i would bang a man (urgh) if it assured prosperity for my people.
bang or be banged by cus the first is a boring sacrifice regularly performed by frats for infinitely lesser causes

The whole 'gay, bisexual, straight' thing is way overplayed in common culture, especially Western culture. There's an unspoken assumption even among the gay community that gayness must be True Gayness with no exception, heterosexuality must be True Hetero with no exception, and bisexuals must be sex maniacs who are attracted to everyone.

The truth probably falls more along the lines of something like the Kinsey Scale where most people could probably find someone of the opposite or same sex they were attracted to if they allowed themselves to. (See Ancient Greece). It's just that society, especially Christian-influenced society, tends to make it much easier for those who lean toward heterosexuality and could is a hell of a long way from will or especially should.
ikr

And in these cases it's usually considering romantic emotional attraction, not just sexual attraction, which can range from genuine but not admitted to "if you've been in prison or on an oil rig for a year, would you be touch-hungry enough to do it with a guy"

Every american show after 2015.
"every" lol

Also, yes, non-sexual romantic relationships like courtly love are definitely a thing. Although the actual asexuality of courtly love is somewhat debatable.
 
Last edited:
The Ymaryn don't have more queer people than other groups, that's silly. They just don't have to hide it, especially if they're shamans. They also get directed to the shamans in the first place, which is why there's a higher percentage of them among the Ymaryn shamans.
In fact, you actually get the opposite. Cultures which accept alternate sexualities naturally breed the genetic tendencies out of the system due to nonproductive relationships being acceptable. Cultures which repress them wind up with a higher proportion because you're going to have children because tradition and custom demands it. Like it or not.
 
In fact, you actually get the opposite. Cultures which accept alternate sexualities naturally breed the genetic tendencies out of the system due to nonproductive relationships being acceptable. Cultures which repress them wind up with a higher proportion because you're going to have children because tradition and custom demands it. Like it or not.
A) misses the discussion of visibility
B) possibly, but it assumes that 1) it's strongly genetic rather than environmental (eg having a lot of sons increases odds of gay son) 2) that the genes wouldn't be passed on by family, 3) people are likely to still be viewed as gay/straight. aka it might have an effect but a severe one? doubtful.
 
Mate every hero we ever had minus the shaman was a sex addict.
Why would it matter now?
Hell the people are still publicly promiscuous, fucking around wouldn't become taboo until the development of monogamy.

That's such a hilariously terrible reason, I can't even argue against it since its illogical.
Er... that's all our heroes bar cowpox guy. Remember how we got the secret of copper?

I'm not planning to convince anyone, but other heros doesn't seems to partake in adultery and incest. Well, it's not like people get killed over it in copper age.
 
There is that. However their initial thoughts were that he could be a great heir. His own abilities would shine forth, just like they did with his mother. She had to work against it as well and made it work with zero help from anyone. She made her own contacts, she fought on her own ballot.

That is the point of the meritocracy.
She fought all the way to our voting booth~

To assign Mag's victory exclusively to her own power is kind of silly, because we forcefully voted her in, an act that caused a stability hit because of her youth. In the same way, to assign the son's win solely to our own vote would be hilariously hypocritical of you. What this vote amounts to is 'does mommy not use her position to help her son, basically torpedoing his career 60-70% of the time' or 'does mommy use her position as expected of her, MAYBE getting people people to think oh how fishy and basically assure his career'.
@Academia Nut made a statement previously about "special effects" if Stability is at 3 from the start to the end of a turn. No temporary drops even if its made up in the mid-turn. No raising it during the turn. Start high, end high.
No, he mentioned that stability had to be sustained throughout an entire turn to count towards the 'maintain stability' bonus, which itself takes multiple consecutive full turns. I don't especially believe we can maintain 3 stability for a minimum assumed 3 full turns, so I don't especially see why I should try to make it happen other than to chase down a ridiculously tricky shiny.
...Ideologue is not a complimentary term. And no, one can genuinely support an ideology without being an ideologue.

Definition of IDEOLOGUE
  1. 1: an impractical idealist : theorist
  2. 2: an often blindly partisan advocate or adherent of a particular ideology
To be clear, I support a meritocracy and oppose hereditary rule. I do not blindly support meritocracy and oppose hereditary rule when such a gesture is very impractical.
Meritocracy is nice. Absolutely refusing to be meritocratic because in one instance, the meritocratic choice is also hereditary, is definitionally an ideological opposition to hereditary rule, to the point that even following another ideology is ignored to snub the one you don't like.
Wow I'm feeling really warm and fuzzy right now.
That's the alcohol. You drunk, go home.
 
In fact, you actually get the opposite. Cultures which accept alternate sexualities naturally breed the genetic tendencies out of the system due to nonproductive relationships being acceptable. Cultures which repress them wind up with a higher proportion because you're going to have children because tradition and custom demands it. Like it or not.
Okay, I didn't bother bringing this up last time you talked about this, because I don't think this is quite the place for it and I'm hardly an expert. However, I'm genuinely getting tired of this level of assertion.

Homosexuality isn't as simple as you seem to think. I could probably have found a non-scientific article that is easier to understand and still based off of a scientific article, but I didn't want people to just be annoyed that I was linking something without obvious scientific backing. This should also, hopefully, go over enough people's heads to not derail the thread while providing enough information on a topic that keeps finding its way to being relevant for others to have some more understanding. I'm also not going to chime in on how I view it, because I recognize the entire argument as deeply complicated and not fully understood at this time, but I do not like how this keeps getting overly simplified.


All that said, *looks at the current tally*. Yeah, I think I'm giving up on this thread having the restraint to ever not chase after the shiny.

Good Luck, Have Fun all.
 
Okay, I didn't bother bringing this up last time you talked about this, because I don't think this is quite the place for it and I'm hardly an expert. However, I'm genuinely getting tired of this level of assertion.

Homosexuality isn't as simple as you seem to think. I could probably have found a non-scientific article that is easier to understand and still based off of a scientific article, but I didn't want people to just be annoyed that I was linking something without obvious scientific backing. This should also, hopefully, go over enough people's heads to not derail the thread while providing enough information on a topic that keeps finding its way to being relevant for others to have some more understanding. I'm also not going to chime in on how I view it, because I recognize the entire argument as deeply complicated and not fully understood at this time, but I do not like how this keeps getting overly simplified.


All that said, *looks at the current tally*. Yeah, I think I'm giving up on this thread having the restraint to ever not chase after the shiny.

Good Luck, Have Fun all.

What shiny?
 
Okay, I didn't bother bringing this up last time you talked about this, because I don't think this is quite the place for it and I'm hardly an expert. However, I'm genuinely getting tired of this level of assertion.

Homosexuality isn't as simple as you seem to think. I could probably have found a non-scientific article that is easier to understand and still based off of a scientific article, but I didn't want people to just be annoyed that I was linking something without obvious scientific backing. This should also, hopefully, go over enough people's heads to not derail the thread while providing enough information on a topic that keeps finding its way to being relevant for others to have some more understanding. I'm also not going to chime in on how I view it, because I recognize the entire argument as deeply complicated and not fully understood at this time, but I do not like how this keeps getting overly simplified.


All that said, *looks at the current tally*. Yeah, I think I'm giving up on this thread having the restraint to ever not chase after the shiny.

Good Luck, Have Fun all.
Dude. Relative proportions. There are more complex factors involved that would be a significant, and irrelevant derail.

Hell, we've been highlighted to get false positives in identification as ambitious girls tended to get funneled into the shamans for being too male for instance.
 
Dude. Relative proportions. There are more complex factors involved that would be a significant, and irrelevant derail.

Hell, we've been highlighted to get false positives in identification as ambitious girls tended to get funneled into the shamans for being too male for instance.
literally all of this is an irrelevant derail
 
He's referring to the hero.
I'm referring to a lot more than the hero.

The hero is just the final straw, because we just gave up a significantly greater advantage for adopting a hereditary system last turn, and now people want to risk us justifying a hereditary system for the sole sake of getting a hero unit for 1-2 turns. It's literally going against our own established interests for a short term advantage, and it's hardly the first time people have done it. It honestly happens most of the time anything the thread generally thinks of as cool comes up.

Dude. Relative proportions. There are more complex factors involved that would be a significant, and irrelevant derail.

Hell, we've been highlighted to get false positives in identification as ambitious girls tended to get funneled into the shamans for being too male for instance.
You've been asserting that homosexuality can be genetically phased out through failed reproduction. There are currently well supported theories that say you are very wrong. I wouldn't have brought this up again, but this is the second time you've been claiming this that I can remember in this thread, so I'd prefer people interested stop coming to this conclusion.
 
If we went full defense spending, we'll get 3 main action related to wall building and tower constructions, in Black River, Eastern Hill, and Southern Coast.
 
I'm just hoping our new king eventually finds a husbandwe don't lose legitimacy for the first time in our history.

That would legitimately make me sad.
 
Back
Top