Since this is now a big debate, I'll say this: I partially agree with Sarn on this one, and here's how:

If there were no gay people at all in the Star Wars universe (whatever that means, considering all the weird creatures and things that exist) then that WOULDN'T be a bad thing. Nor would it be a good thing. It would be a completely irrelevant thing. Like "what if there were no green people in Star Wars?" ....well then there'd be not green people and nobody would go around saying "gosh it sure seems like there should be some green people somewhere, my life feels kinda empty without that existing."

If you want to discuss the implications of the creation of the fictional Star Wars universe not having any overtly gay characters, or whatever, then fine, but it's a controversial subject and the dude was just trying to tell a story about a dude and his dad without getting all bogged down in politics.

Edit: Oh and I guess now we're arguing the relative benefits and drawbacks of homosexuality or something? That's a terrible conversation to have. Just completely dumb. Why don't we have a smiley where I climb up onto a high horse and ride the high road to an ivory tower? We need that.

I don't think so. Rather I think what he really means is that the world would be a much better place if we didn't have this "minority concept" that separates us on issues such as on sexuality and race. What Antony missed, not surprisingly, by editing his post to "confirm that [he is] a bigoted piece of ****" is that the proper way to edit his post to allude to race would have been to imply that everyone was of the same race. I don't think Sarn was in anyway saying the world would be a better place because there would be no gay people but that the world would be a better place because the strife caused, mostly to gay people, wouldn't exist.

But what do I know? I'm a bigot too.

Ha ha! Im using the internet!

No Gays in Star Wars? what about Jar jar Binks?

"Meesa love you, yousa saved me again."

For some reason I expected that to read "Meesa love you long time, honey. Yousa make me so horny".

You know, saying the world would be better if a persecuted group of people simply didn't exist isn't really a valid point. The world would be better if they weren't persecuted. The world would be better if bigoted dickfaces like you two didn't exist.

Maybe you guys should argue first about what the hell "better" means, before trying to fit any scenarios into that category. Just sayin'. Where's my horse.

Thanks, Bob for getting it. I don't get why everyone's having so much trouble with this concept.

Also, there need be no definition of the word "better" because I never used it. If they want to define better, then they can do so, but it has no bearing on my claim.

Also.. isn't there some kind of rule on this forum about personal attacks? What ever happened to that?

*cough*

Why can beings in Lucas' stories have extra appendages, speech impediments and refer to their individual selves as a collective, but homosexuality, a thing actually observed on earth in humans and other animals, is not present? I don't buy the argument that he wants to avoid the argument, since it'd just be easier to say "I'm sure there are some gay characters in the star wars universe, I just didn't happen to depict it specifically in any of my movies." Instead I think he's either pandering to a belief system, or the argument is that the diversity of his aliens is a simile to our unmentioned and timeless real world problems. I haven't heard him say that though, and it sure does give him a lot of credit.

Sarn on the other hand isn't saying anything of value at all. A person with a severe disability or disease might say "I wish it didn't exist," but I have a hard time believing minorities or gay people would rather their feelings simply not exist unless others around them are the ones with the problem. So no, I think it'd be better if homophobia didn't exist.

I agree. where did I say otherwise? :p

Haha. You must be drunk again. I've never been a bigot, I just said I was because I was trollin' for you fishie.

The line between "disease" or "disability" and personal preference/attribute is...pretty thin, and largely societally based, I'd say. Now, don't read too much into this, I don't intend it to be a direct analogy, but what's the difference between someone being born with a natural tendency to being a sociopath or something, and then environmental factors bringing that out, and being born with a tendency toward homosexuality and environmental factors bringing it out? Or being born with a tendency toward high intelligence and environmental factors bringing that out? The difference is really only in how society accepts it. We don't like sociopaths because they work differently from us, and that often manifests itself in ways society agrees are bad. Intelligent people are sometimes liked and sometimes disliked due to their differences. Homosexuals are unfortunately on the end of the spectrum where currently a whole lot of people don't like it.

I'm rambling, but the point is that "disease" and "disability" are often just lines drawn in the sand by society and nothing more, most particularly when it comes to variation in mental processes. Those make people nervous because differences like these make it harder to relate to people, and therefore harder to empathize with them.

The character Ziro the Hutt was Lucas' idea. You could argue that Hutts are a sexless species, but the fact remains that he's a lot more androgynous than his cousin Jabba. No matter how you look at it, it does address the issue of sexual identity. I don't think it was included for pure comic relief, it just adds to the diversity of the GFFA.



Yeah, it's such an effort to treat others respectfully what with all those gays and ******s walking around.



No, you're not saying it's 'better', but you're implying it's more advantageous, thus 'better':







I disagree. People feel the need to relate to characters. Example, female Star Wars fans have been complaining about a lack of a major female action hero since forever. (I'm talking about the movies.)

1. You've always been a bigot.

2. I haven't started drinking yet tonight.

Well, if I had to choose, I guess I would rather be perceived as a bigot by an idiot than as an idiot by a bigot, but seriously, the bigot charge would be extremely hard for you, especially someone like you, to prove.

Dont bring the rules up or he'll call you a 12 year old.

Well I and Wookie06 will have to just stick around a little longer in existence to antagonize your ASS! I totally resent that insult and declare that you are just as much as a dickface, The Marines are going to love your attitude!

Well it sure does seem to be for a lot of people...
no... can you do me a favor and stop deciding I mean something even though I never said it, just so you can argue?

1) he means as it would relate to the characters in the universe, not the fans. 2) How is Princess Leia *not* a major female action hero? (especially in RotJ)

Sarah Connor is a major female action hero. Princess Leia is a damsel in distress that likes to spectate on the battles.

yeah, spectate my ass. Watch the movies again. She's firing a ST rifle from the hip for the majority of EP 4, and basically leads the attack on the shield outpost in EP 6. (not to mention she kills Jabba the Hutt by strangling him with a chain)

She kills a handful of enemies throughout the films. So do Merry and Pippan. They're hardly action heroes (also probably gay).

Now be careful how you say that, you dont want to say anything that will portray yourself as a dickface bigot:P

Umm, not counting the space battle scenes she probably kills about as many people as any of the main heroes in the OT.

Also, the homosexual undertones of Merry and Pippin, while definitely present in the movies, are, as far as I can tell, non-existent in the books. (Also, it's my opinion that Peter Jackson's perversion of Tolkien's characters is somewhat a travesty.)

...there were homosexual undertones? I thought the dudes were just good friends. Also they are hobbits.

Dammit, I thought we had decided that we were old enough to relax the rules around here a bit. I for one don't want to have to wade through endless posts of "Bigot!" "Racist!" "No you just don't understand me" while I am trying to figure out whether or not the Star Wars universe is a nice place to live and if I should consider moving there.

As of now, the discussion of bigotry is to be moved to private message. There, each of the involved parties will hopefully do one of the following:

1. See the error of their ways and realize the other side is right
2. Win the internet by convincing those with opposing viewpoints that they are wrong
3. Realize that it was all just a big misunderstanding, and get along happily ever after
4. Refuse to get along and simply block each other, rather than continuing to ruin this thread

Anyone who continues this argument in this thread (or elsewhere) will face consequences.

Oh, alright, DS...

[EDIT:] I spent a lot of time writing this up, so I didn't read DS' post. It doesn't attack anyone personally, so can we just leave this here, as it's mostly just interesting information? (Or so I would hope)



I'm trying. Are you saying homosexuality is a disease or disability but society doesn't like calling it that?



Homosexuals are not born with a 'tendency' that is 'brought out' by environmental factors.

There was a very interesting (American) documentary on Discovery last month (here in the Netherlands, that is) on the causes of homosexuality. Part of it was about brain psychology and another part was about a project in which they were researching twins, and then specifically twins of which one was gay and the other was not. Several interesting conclusions were shown.

I'll just summarize everything I saw for the sake of completeness.

1. Brain activity scans show that homosexual men show exactly the same activity patterns as heterosexual women. Homosexual men also have the same issues as heterosexual women with regard to reading maps and 3D coordination in general. These are things that the female brain is less talented in. There are always exceptions of course, but in general the trend is the same. In other words, brains of gay men function exactly like female brains.

2. People often think that homosexuals have some kind of choice in the matter in terms of what turns them on. This is not true. When people are confronted with sexual images that arouse them, the sexuality part of the brain reacts before you can even think about it. (Bisexual people may have a preference for one or the other, but will be aroused by both - but that is a whole other matter)

Homosexual men hooked up to brain scanners showed zero excitement when confronted with images of naked women. So, if you're having doubts about your sexuality you can simply have them test it. A brain scan will undeniably tell you within a minute if you're gay or straight. It's not an urge you can suppress or a test you can fake.

The part of the brain we're talking about is developed during the 6th and 7th month of pregnancy.

So, it's not a 'tendency', it's totally predetermined.

3. One of the causes of homosexuality in men is a lack of testosterone in the mother's body during pregnancy. Every time a woman gives birth to a son, her ability to produce testosterone diminishes. A lack of testosterone will affect the development of the sexuality part of the brain in the 6th and 7th month of pregnancy.

This explains why it often happens that, in families with three or more sons, the youngest brother(s) is (are) gay.

An uncle of mine has four brothers of which the youngest three are gay. My best friend in high school had two brothers, one older and one younger, of which the youngest later turned out to be gay.

4. There is also evidence that shows homosexuality can have a genetic cause. They were researching a number of twins of which one was gay and the other was not. They discovered that there was a genetic difference between the Y-chromosomes of the brothers. The Y-Chromosome (which regulates the production of testosterone and which is crucial in embryonic development) of the gay brothers showed a peculiarity that was not found in the Y-chromosomes of the straight brothers.

That is all that I can remember from the top of my head, hope some of you have seen it too.

Of course it shouldn't matter whether one's sexuality is a matter of choice, but the fact is that it's not (unless you're bisexual, but even then).

ORJ, I didn't see it, but then again I already understand that homosexuality isn't a choice, and while I didn't know the specific developmental causes you specified, I understood that it was a predetermined thing.

Thanks for the info. I'm always interested in learning something new.

I hope that was for the benefit of those reading (and it was very interesting, I didn't know the first part of that), thanks.

But, like I said, I wasn't trying to make a direct analogy or to pinpoint the cause of homosexuality. Doesn't matter to my point at all. Okay, so you are just straight up born GAY. Compare it (theoretically) to someone just being born with the potential for a really high IQ, or the inability to empathize properly with other people, or really long limbs that make them pretty tall and skinny, or a pretty face, or what have you. This is all just variation, nothing makes any of these things really "bad" or "wrong" or "good". I don't even mean this in the philosophical sense, I mean it in a real, practical sense; all of these things have positive and negative attributes and the way they are labeled is largely a function of the current societal norms.

To come back around to your first quote of me: No, you've got it backwards. I don't think homosexuality is a disease or disability any more than any other variation as discussed, but society likes to categorize, and it does so based on its own often fairly arbitrary definitions.

Right, I really wasn't sure how to interpret what you were saying, but I think I see what you mean now.

I mean... I agree with the notion that if gays didn't exist then they wouldn't be persecuted as well... I mean I know I wouldn't want to be a gay man.

Seems like there's a pretty good chance it might be a pain in the ass.

hmm

This thread is so ****ing gay

I started this in order to get some discussion going.
Even if it has veered so far off the tracks that the train is now a boat, I think I have succeeded.
P.S Obama Mosque 9/11 jews

hey tibby did you realize that Star Wars isn't a place

Tiberium_Empire won't have an epiphany like that.

Instead he craps every thing that runs through his mind onto these forums like some sort of a wet brain fart.

If a person has wet brain farts, does their brain get mushy?

jews?

Nah, but stupid **** ends up all over the place.

Cerebral Diarrhea?