Player Gender Equality in PWI

SerenityMare - Dreamweaver

Lesthar - Heavens Tear wrote: »

Esnemyl - Dreamweaver wrote: »

Lesthar - Heavens Tear wrote: »

shining feather... urgh! b:spit

I'd give him a T-shirt.

Noooooo. Barbs are sexy shirtless b:dirty

Lesthar - Heavens Tear

SerenityMare - Dreamweaver wrote: »

Lesthar - Heavens Tear wrote: »

Esnemyl - Dreamweaver wrote: »

Noooooo. Barbs are sexy shirtless b:dirty

I'm a dude, so I dunno about that. b:laugh

ACLucius - Archosaur

Darksylph - Heavens Tear wrote: »

Ok i'm all for homosexuality and all, but for you to think you can try to say the BIBLE supports homosexuality is just ignorant to whats ACTUALLY in the bible.

1st of all, theres a direct passage in the old testament that says all homosexuals shall be stoned to death.

Secondly, it specifically states "man shall not lay down with another man"

Thirdly, it says marriage is only between a man and a woman.

Fourthly, it says sex of any kind is for the sole purpose of procreation, something which obviously homosexual sexual activity can not accomplish. Everything besides procreational sex is sodomy, something which is specifically prohibited.

Lastly, the rules put forth by god in the Bible were for mankind, and dont apply to animals. Its not that animals cant sin, its that sin doesnt apply to animals. Animals also kill each other, and not just for food, does this mean killing is ok because it exists in nature?

Why do you think its taking the catholic church so incredibly long to come to terms with homosexuality? Its pretty direct that according to the word of god in a literal interpretation of the bible, that homosexuality is not allowed.


Final word tho, i'm in no way in agreement with the above thoughts, but i merely had to say that noone who knows anything about the bible can say its pro-homosexual.

I never said the Bible was in favor of homosexuality. I am saying though that it is a logical fallacy within the Bible. Now, as I had said, animals run on basic instinct, and do not have sex for pleasure (except dolphins). This means their only reason for sex would be procreation. However, there are many cases of animal homosexuality, implying they were, based on the Bible, made that way. I think that God wouldn't have looked over this minor detail if it indeed was wrong. The reason homosexuality is considered a sin is as said, for procreation. However, consider that if he made animals to be homosexual, that goes against everything that has been said on homosexuality, and is therefore a huge contradiction.

Animals kill each other, but they do it for reasons in which it is acceptable to us and even by the Bible's standards. If something tries to harm their offspring, they will kill. If something tries to harm them, they will kill.

Yet we come to something else which the Bible shows as an fallacy. I'm sure you remember the classic comparison of the Old Testament saying "eye for an eye" directly contradicts the sixth commandment (thou shalt not murder). Now, with all the logical holes within the Bible, should anyone be expected to be able to use the Bible in support of anything? No, and that is for one simple quote.

'Whatever you shall loose on earth will be loosed in heaven, and whatever you shall bind on earth will be bound in heaven.''

I'm quite certain that there are many clergy members who believe homosexuality is alright and only have to have said it for it to no longer be a sin. Seeing as the Pope (neither Benedict nor John Paul) have said outright that homosexuals will not be allowed in heaven, there is no one to contradict any who say they will and that it is alright. So, the moment a member of the clergy says either consensual sex or homosexuality is alright, it no longer is a sin. Now, I cannot say one way or another on if a clergy member has said it, but chances are pretty good in these times that someone has.

So, while the Bible isn't pro-homosexual (which I had never said it was in the first place), it also has too many possible and actual contradictions to be a reliable source for making a position on many subjects.

/Groovy/ - Harshlands wrote: »

Wrong.

There are some animals that sometimes kill young ones of own species (lions, for example). According to your logic, I could go and randomly kill babies and it would be fine.

Human is not an animal because has morality. We know the difference between good and evil acts, animals are driven only by instinct.

If you want to claim that men can do everything what animals do, why don't you follow the example of fish and never speak again?


Oh, and there are no homosexual animals. What they do is the part of their social life, somthing like hugs for us, and is not even close to what we, humans, call love. If there would be homosexual animals they would breed too slow and extinct fast.

Now after my reply to her's, do you really want me to reply to yours? I don't think I will, as I have already explained it well enough. As far as there not being homosexuality among animals, just use Google. I think even you can find plenty of articles that will show support, by scientists and biologists, of which I'm quite sure you probably are not.

However, I will say you are wrong about killing randomly. Killing of offspring is done by males which want to ensure their genetic DNA is preserved while others are eliminated. Based on your avatar, I will assume you are a female, and therefore it would be your duty to protect your own, not kill others. Yet we will come to a final conclusion in that as I have shown, there are too many contradictions, namely the last I made, that will not allow the Bible as a pedestal on which to place your entire moral beliefs. In case you had forgotten, murder is wrong, yet the church condoned it during the crusades, making it acceptable. What happens should a Pope come along and say "killing anyone is fine as long as you hate them or the trespassed against you?"

I won't be nearly as rude as your comments have shown you to be, and I'll think only that you were not in an entirely good mood when writing that. I certainly hope though attempts at insulting others is not a hobby of yours, otherwise you might find some hobbies just don't come naturally.

ShadowsWrath - Heavens Tear

Neither side can use The Bible/Religion etc as an arguement, since those are based on faith and beliefs rather than cold hard facts.

Using what might be a fantasy book to argue over a fantasy game b:shutup

/inb4lock

LenieClarke - Heavens Tear

ACLucius - Archosaur wrote: »

Now, as I had said, animals run on basic instinct, and do not have sex for pleasure (except dolphins).

unless you can somehow read the minds of animals, there is no possible way you can know that. and if you're making educated guesses as to animals' mindsets based on their behavior (which is reasonable), then dolphins are certainly not the only species to act as if they enjoy themselves during sex. even **** sex.

besides, assuming that animals only have sex for the reason of procreation implicitly assumes all those animals understand sex leads to offspring. now, probably some of them do (at least after they've had a litter or two), but surely not all.

Animals kill each other, but they do it for reasons in which it is acceptable to us

minks famously kill more than they can eat, and leave their kills to rot, apparently just because they like to kill. (anti-fur activists who release minks get no sympathy from me; mink are a quite destructive invasive species most places they're farmed.)

as for "reasons in which it is acceptable to us", that could be interpreted several ways, and i can't know which way you meant it. animals do occasionally kill each other for reasons we humans tend to find abhorrent; some research on chimpanzees, for instance, has documented rather gruesome cases of infanticide and cannibalism. then again, chimps are more like us than any other extant species spare the bonobos...

Aubree - Dreamweaver

gggggaaaaaaaaayyyyyyy rrrrrriiiiiiiigggggggggggghhhhhtttttttttsssssss

FateMakerr - Heavens Tear

Aubree - Dreamweaver wrote: »

gggggaaaaaaaaayyyyyyy rrrrrriiiiiiiigggggggggggghhhhhtttttttttsssssss

+1b:surrender

I find it hard to believe that marriage in PW does not cover 1 man + 1 man, however 1 woman + 1 panda is okey:<

Vivre - Harshlands

FateMakerr - Heavens Tear wrote: »

+1b:surrender

I find it hard to believe that marriage in PW does not cover 1 man + 1 man, however 1 woman + 1 panda is okey:<

LOL! Woot interspecies marriages. That made me laugh n.n

although in Chinese mythology, there are plenty of relationships between humans and spirits/demons/etc. I'm not sure how the species thing factors in though b:chuckle

Jennalicious - Sanctuary

Why don't all of you people who want **** marriage just fly to China and protest in front of PWE's corporate office?

Understand this: This issue has been brought up numerous times. GM's have said that it will never be implemented. IT WON"T HAPPEN! Say what you want, QQ all you want, and be pissed off all you want. Continuously QQ'ing about it on the forum won't change this. Accept it or leave. That simple.

FateMakerr - Heavens Tear

Jennalicious - Sanctuary wrote: »

Why don't all of you people who want **** marriage just fly to China and protest in front of PWE's corporate office?

Because I'm busy protesting at rallys for SB1070 in Arizonab:surrender

ACLucius - Archosaur

LenieClarke - Heavens Tear wrote: »

unless you can somehow read the minds of animals, there is no possible way you can know that. and if you're making educated guesses as to animals' mindsets based on their behavior (which is reasonable), then dolphins are certainly not the only species to act as if they enjoy themselves during sex. even **** sex.

besides, assuming that animals only have sex for the reason of procreation implicitly assumes all those animals understand sex leads to offspring. now, probably some of them do (at least after they've had a litter or two), but surely not all.

You are right, I can't "know" for certain what an animal thinks. Perhaps they are as smart as Brian on Family Guy, or perhaps they are as stupid as a zombie. However, I will say that they do not have sex for the purpose of pleasure, and that can be backed up by the fact they only mate during set times when it is most likely to produce offspring, again with certain exceptions of some animals. Now, we can assume they know what they are doing because many animals, such as turtles are never taught how to do anything. They know what to do by instinct. Take specifically sea turtles. When they hatch, they instantly head for water. They are never told or taught, they simply know.

minks famously kill more than they can eat, and leave their kills to rot, apparently just because they like to kill. (anti-fur activists who release minks get no sympathy from me; mink are a quite destructive invasive species most places they're farmed.)

While I can agree they may enjoy the kill, they still do it to eat, even if they don't eat all of what they kill (yes, I'm including prey it doesn't even touch after killing). However, I can also use the same argument that you don't know why it kills more than it eats. Perhaps it kills because it is some super-intelligent animal that is trying to eliminate competitors or starve out others. Or, perhaps it just simply doesn't know how much it will need to eat, so it stocks up. Or maybe it just likes to kill, but as you can't read their minds, you must also base any assumptions on behavior.

as for "reasons in which it is acceptable to us", that could be interpreted several ways, and i can't know which way you meant it. animals do occasionally kill each other for reasons we humans tend to find abhorrent; some research on chimpanzees, for instance, has documented rather gruesome cases of infanticide and cannibalism. then again, chimps are more like us than any other extant species spare the bonobos...

With intelligence comes desires beyond instinct. As intelligent as they are, primates tend to have more desires just as we do, as well as more misunderstanding tendencies. I'm sure to many animals, our choice to play a video game would fathom them if they were to ever try to contemplate what we are doing and why. However, in general, most animals will kill for reasons we can understand and accept of them, such as one other pointed out, lions killing the offspring to ensure only their genetic code passes on, to protect themselves as well as offspring, to eat (and killing to maintain territory falls under this), and many more.

I hope I have answered any and all questions you had to your satisfaction. Let me know if they were not.

Darksylph - Heavens Tear

Cyanea - Lost City wrote: »

If you wear a pair of basement rockers, a bohemian or wingspan skirt and a summer pattern or a veranda smock for your blouse, you would not be wearing revealing clothing, nor would you be wearing high heels. The yukata and its shoes also seem like good counter examples (though the yukata heals do have a bit of lift to them). I am sure I could find others.

The high heels is a modelling issue. Either everything is high heels, or nothing is. They cant lift the heels & then but them back down on other models, it simply doesnt work, since all female models share the same skeletal structure (game modelling term, similar to RL skeleton, but deals with the mathematics of movement of models). Even the sneaker type shoes look a bit dumb because they try to hide the fact the the models heel is still quite hide, if you were to think its lower on the ground, the calf would be overly long. Its an all or none kind of thing and in this game they decided to do it as a style.

There's many games i dont like the look or style of the model. But sorry you cant complain and expect a change, its part of the game you chose to play or not play. Like it & stay or dont like it and leave. Noone comes on & says they dont like the style of the scenery & demands a change, or they dont like the RPG style & demand it become FPS. It is what it is and its what you chose to play.

Fiery_Demon - Heavens Tear

I myself like marriage and all the other flirting options just like they are right now, and I'd be very upset if it was changed. Call me oldfashioned, I just prefer it that way. And as said, it is a game, and the main point is killing monsters, not smooching with your bf/gf <.< There are plenty of games where you can go and do that if you want.

Only thing I don't like is the heel option, but that can't be changed so no point in complaining. Besides, we've got Leather boots and Steampunk shoes now, and I like those.



EDIT: To the poster below, maybe I should change my wording, that is, change the word "like". My point was that it's fine the way it is now, and if there were more options for people, the game wouldn't be so much about killing monsters anymore. You misunderstood me totally, I'd prefer if there were no marriage and all that **** at all.

Aubree - Dreamweaver

Fiery_Demon - Heavens Tear wrote: »

I myself like marriage and all the other flirting options just like they are right now, and I'd be very upset if it was changed. Call me oldfashioned, I just prefer it that way. And as said, it is a game, and the main point is killing monsters, not smooching with your bf/gf <.< There are plenty of games where you can go and do that if you want.

Only thing I don't like is the heel option, but that can't be changed so no point in complaining. Besides, we've got Leather boots and Steampunk shoes now, and I like those.

Do you even know how much you contradicted yourself? Or was it too self centered to even realize? If it's just a game why be upset if they changed it? Glad to see you like the smooching and flirting "how you like it". Thats not old fashioned.. its just selfish.

I for one don't really care either way, but dont make stupid arguments about how it is what you want. It's really about what PWE wants.

XHappyBunnyx - Sanctuary

Jennalicious - Sanctuary wrote: »

Why don't all of you people who want **** marriage just fly to China and protest in front of PWE's corporate office?

Understand this: This issue has been brought up numerous times. GM's have said that it will never be implemented. IT WON"T HAPPEN! Say what you want, QQ all you want, and be pissed off all you want. Continuously QQ'ing about it on the forum won't change this. Accept it or leave. That simple.

why does it bother you so much? lol you even put something in your sig.

FateMakerr - Heavens Tear

XHappyBunnyx - Sanctuary wrote: »

why does it bother you so much? lol you even put something in your sig.

seriouslyb:lipcurl

Pegasi - Lost City

First: WoW kicks this game to the ground and stomps on it's face. It may not look as nice but it's the better game. it has more content, more to do, less generic **** and a better system. Not to mention Blizzard actually gets around to fixing bugs and cash shoppers only own if it's a Private Server.
Second: PWI Developers suck, we've been asking for them to fix this sexist junk for..... uh.... since I started the month this game opened it's gates to the public. And back then all we wanted was the Cuddle feature to be changed!

I have the same issue with this game. I can't pick up or carry my spouse around, nor can I marry or any of that. I put up with it for way longer than I should have. Usually this sort of thing happens because the Devs themselves are sexist and/or homophobic. I bet you that is exactly what it is. It's always that when games go this way.
PWI Devs don't listen to the players, they only listen when we hold up our collective wallet and go "You can't have it until you do what we asked you to do." Then they cry at our feet and plead with us and go "oh! No! Please don't! We'll get right on it! We promise!" And then continue to milk out wavering patience until we do it again.

Darksylph - Heavens Tear

Pegasi - Lost City wrote: »

Second: PWI Developers suck, we've been asking for them to fix this sexist junk for..... uh.... since I started the month this game opened it's gates to the public. And back then all we wanted was the Cuddle feature to be changed!

I have the same issue with this game. I can't pick up or carry my spouse around, nor can I marry or any of that. I put up with it for way longer than I should have. Usually this sort of thing happens because the Devs themselves are sexist and/or homophobic. I bet you that is exactly what it is. It's always that when games go this way.
PWI Devs don't listen to the players, they only listen when we hold up our collective wallet and go "You can't have it until you do what we asked you to do." Then they cry at our feet and plead with us and go "oh! No! Please don't! We'll get right on it! We promise!" And then continue to milk out wavering patience until we do it again.

You're asking for a fix on something which completely conflicts with their culture entirely. Like i said in a prior post, to them, the devs, what you're asking is a-kin to adding drug-use & **** to the game. By that i mean they find it moral objectionable. China has a much more old-fashion point of view when it comes to the relationship between the genders. We should almost be lucky that they allow female characters in the game at all. But they still believe in the traditional roles of the males carrying and supporting the females, and all the U.S. crying in the world will not change their cultural stance on this issue. If the game were developed in Japan, we'd probably find alot more equality between the genders, but some people in this thread seem to lump all asians together (something rather ignorant in itself) rather then realizing those are 2 distinctly different cultures. This is how the game is, from the culture in which it comes, its not a "bug" its how they morally view things, and that will not change.

LenieClarke - Heavens Tear

Darksylph - Heavens Tear wrote: »

You're asking for a fix on something which completely conflicts with their culture entirely. Like i said in a prior post, to them, the devs, what you're asking is a-kin to adding drug-use & **** to the game.

so if there's ever an MMO in the Grand Theft Auto franchise, and it opens to Chinese players, you're saying we're gonna lose Perfect World due to all the developers' heads spontaneously exploding? b:laugh

Ranfa - Dreamweaver

Omg people this is a game. Stop mirroring it to the real life culture. Sheesh...
Next thing you know America is full of drug dealers, angry mafia, corrupt cops, and whack radio stations...

Darksylph - Heavens Tear

LenieClarke - Heavens Tear wrote: »

so if there's ever an MMO in the Grand Theft Auto franchise, and it opens to Chinese players, you're saying we're gonna lose Perfect World due to all the developers' heads spontaneously exploding? b:laugh

Not sure on their stance on violence and theft in a game. I think they culturally accept that into game making, but i'm not sure. If it was against some of their government policies tho, it would be blocked. In fact, there was a problem with WoW, as to why WoW decided not to make a Pandaran race. It had to do with China would officially block the game if harm was being done to Pandas in a game. Blizzard didnt want to lose the country of china as an audience, so they didnt develop the race. (I'm actually surprised there are Panda barbs in this game, i have no answer as to how that seems to conflict with the WoW problem). But indeed China will entirely block a game from their country if it goes against their policy making.

Ranfa - Dreamweaver wrote: »

Omg people this is a game. Stop mirroring it to the real life culture. Sheesh...
Next thing you know America is full of drug dealers, angry mafia, corrupt cops, and whack radio stations...

Thats a very American or European Ethnocentric Attitude. Sorry, but the Chinese governments official stand on homosexuality is "There is no homosexuality in China". They are heavy in government oversight on everything, down to filtering web search engines on anything they dont believe in. In the united states & europe, things can exist in games which are objectionable to others, due to the freedoms we are afforded. In China, this is not they case, they cant put things into the video games they create if they go against their culture. This game is from that country, and must follow those "real life culture" rules.

Riverwell - Archosaur

I totally totally almost passed this post by. This has been a totally totally over discussed topic, and brings the same **** in every time.

But seriously?:

The character creation screen at least had some androgynous choices of hair style so I could fashion the character to be less stereotypically feminine. I chose the mowhawk after my RL hairstyle, but it looks completely ridiculous with all the revealing female objectifying clothes my character is forced to wear LOL!

ROFLMAO! Yeah, you were totally 'forced' to buy objectifying clothes for your characters to flaunt around in. I don't under stand this argument. Either 1. Don't wear fashion or 2. Wear fashion that isn't revealing or objectifying.

Darksylph - Heavens Tear

Riverwell - Archosaur wrote: »

I totally totally almost passed this post by. This has been a totally totally over discussed topic, and brings the same **** in every time.

But seriously?:



ROFLMAO! Yeah, you were totally 'forced' to buy objectifying clothes for your characters to flaunt around in. I don't under stand this argument. Either 1. Don't wear fashion or 2. Wear fashion that isn't revealing or objectifying.

May also be referring to gear under level 50. Heavy armor isnt very covering until you get above level 50. Same with other armor styles.

Myerling - Sanctuary

i love how people argue about stuff that doesn't really affect their lives

Jennalicious - Sanctuary

XHappyBunnyx - Sanctuary wrote: »

why does it bother you so much? lol you even put something in your sig.

FateMakerr - Heavens Tear wrote: »

seriouslyb:lipcurl

Why do the both of you care? Can't deal with the fact that there are always two sides to every argument?

I added that to my sig so the thick-headed people might take the hint that it'll never happen. I'm glad you find it funny. I'm guessing shiny objects fascinate you too.

FateMakerr - Heavens Tear

Egotistical much?oo?


All I said was "seriously" and you take it sooo personally, lol. In any case, I wrote it to make a point on what many are saying throughout this thread. Why would someone feel Soo strongly on an issue that is of minimal consequence to both the game and the player IRL? Why would someone such as yourself go so far to "have a side" as to place a semi-flamey statement such as that in your sig? I use the term semi-flamey due to the fact that is is an issue that may indeed strike some as almost personal. The opposing arguments are much more than mere "QQ"s, some may indeed feel a legitimate sense of segregation, yet to you, it's petty whining. I'm sorry to say, but you Jenna need to get over yourself a bit. The world, or PW for that matter certainly does not revolve around your giant ego.

Back on topic though...

As for me, as a **** individual myself, I really have come to accept how Perfect World is currently. Whether it be marriage, cuddling, etc... I'd like to say that it is a stretch to ask for change. It is everyone's own personal choice to play this game, nothing is preventing them from going to another of the hundreds of mmos out there. I have come to realize that this was a decision that was made in the game development within it's host country, and I have come to respect that decision. Although many things may become socially acceptable in the Western culture, please know that that is not the case globally. We must still have respect for all countries and their beliefs. Period.

Deceptistar - Sanctuary

jaxnxay wrote: »

Everything is gender restricted from clothing and shoes (female characters can only wear high heels and mostly skirts)

your dont have to wear clothes

to not being able to pick up and carry another same gendered character,

this kinda sucks yes

and at this point obviously the exclusion of same gendered character marriage.

Most games that are smart enough to not want to deal with moral issues bombarded from the public and the media will refrain from these things. You shouldnt force suggest things on companies without knowing the stress the company will have to deal with its consequence. selfish you.

I'm surprised the quests and fighting abilities aren't gender restricted as well! The character creation screen at least had some androgynous choices of hair style so I could fashion the character to be less stereotypically feminine. I chose the mowhawk after my RL hairstyle, but it looks completely ridiculous with all the revealing female objectifying clothes my character is forced to wear LOL!

if you are trying to be 'bu.tch', make a guy character and make it femenine. its possible. ive seen some men made by girls that looked waaayyyyy to bishi lol

In conclusion, this has been my first and probably my last post on these forums. I am conflicted as to whether or not I should continue playing PWI or go back to WOW. I find it incongruent calling a game PERFECT WORLD when it simply mirrors all of the injustices of our modern real world, very far from perfect. I want to play and like and PWI, it has a ton of great features and beautiful graphics, but I feel my community has been alienated by it and I don't think I can turn a blind eye to something so blatantly wrong.

pwi seriously cannot meet the needs of every player so if you are wondering then you probably should go back. Sooner or later there will be players wanting wheelchairs and crutches because 'this game is biased and only promotes certain types of people/animals'

Jennalicious - Sanctuary

-

FateMakerr - Heavens Tear wrote: »

QQ. Blah, blah.

Fixed.

Why do I take a side?

Simple.

Some people find it offensive that **** marriage is not allowed and there are no **** 'rights'. I find it offensive and repulsive to think how PWI would be if such a thing was implemented (which it never will be). Not everyone supports homosexuality. Not everyone believes that it should be accepted. Not everyone sees it as an 'alternative lifestyle'. People come on here and talk about '**** rights'. Though I don't like it, they are permitted to do so. Same as how I am permitted to be against it. And before someone brings this up, it has nothing to do with morals or religion. I view it on a more psychological standpoint.

LenieClarke - Heavens Tear

(/me takes notes on which servers, and players, to avoid associating with in the future. for the record, i'm perfectly happy to share a server - even though not a sexual orientation - with FateMakerr.)

Nahktuul - Archosaur

Interesting conversations here. These threads always are.

I like free entertainment.