Frustrating relative lack of LGBT NPCs in this game

[Midareyukki]

Good news is that the rights that Trans people already have, prevent them from being systematically murdered.

Unfortunately, freedom of speech means that people are free to show they they're useless pieces of human trash, and the stupidity of American voters keep those pieces of trash in office.

What SPECIFIC rights need to be secured? All I hear is "Someone might actually do something (that is against the rights that everyone has and would only happen in a dystopian novel because it would mean somehow redefining what a "human" is)."

Meh. Freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom of consequence. And let's be honest, as good and well-intentioned as the US's first amendment is, there are other amendments blocking parts of it, so it's really not as sacrosanct as it sounds.

And I can't speak for the US. I don't know any of the laws there. I just know that there's quite a lot over there being repealled, and given your history with gun violence and overall people freely acting on their extreme racism and discrimination, I for sure wouldn't put it past the country to have some lacking rights or outright denial of rights. Only you can speak for the US, and I'm sorry if this hurts your feelings, but it is important that there are laws not only securing people's rights but also making sure they feel safe. Otherwise what's the point of, say, gay marriage if the moment a lesbian couple walks into civil registry they're gunned down?

Hyperbole, I know, but a) It's the US. That's REALLY the image you guys project to the world, and b) I honestly wouldn't put it past some crazy people to do so. When you have crazy people in the civil offices denying to marry them under "freedom of speech", then y'all got a problem.

Speaking on my corner of the world, yeah. We have laws in place for people to get married, but as far as I know none on gender changes or trans people in general. With a rather violent political party being too outspoken about violently murdering us. And guess which party is currently on the rise. And no, we don't have any 1st amendment securing freedom of speech, it's just implied in our constitution to be a thing. Hasn't stopped us from being a dictatorship before.

Sometimes it's not about laws securing rights. It's about safeguards. About not being buldgeoned to death for using what some consider to be the "wrong bathroom".

And isn't there a place in the US where they passed a bill saying they wanted to inspect underaged kids's privates before using a toilet? Like, again, it's not violation of rights... but it's definitely something that doesn't make anyone, straight people included, feel secure.

Quick Edit: Laws help normalize things. Don't just think laws stop at "securing rights". There's more to it than that, and you know there is.

[Aelin_Ashryver]

Meh. Freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom of consequence. And let's be honest, as good and well-intentioned as the US's first amendment is, there are other amendments blocking parts of it, so it's really not as sacrosanct as it sounds.

Freedom of speech literally is freedom from consequence. The government cannot prosecute you for your speech, that's the whole point. Other private citizens can choose not to associate with you or your business, private business can refuse to serve you (banning in a game over hate speech for ex).

Shoving off all the people deemed bigots into remote corners and not letting them speak sounds great in theory. But you just force them into echo chambers where they will get no exposure to opposing viewpoints or maybe meet someone who will actually have them change their mind. They are much more likely to become radicalised in such situations.

Personally if a small private business does not want to serve someone, that's their right imo. Even if their reason for doing so is utterly stupid. Refusing to bake a cake for a gay couple for example. If they are going to refuse you service based on your sexuality then take your money elsewhere and make it known to other lgbt they should too. Forcing them to bake a cake makes no sense to me, because you are paying them when they object to your existence. Why would you? On the same premise if someone wanted a business meant to serve exclusively lgbt, they should have the right to do so without being forced to serve straight + cis people. Each business is knowingly taking a loss and customers have no shortage of other options to choose from. Only exclusions to such things should be human rights such as healthcare. Refusing life saving treatment due to your religious views should indeed be criminal.

Right wing politics is on the rise because people are frankly tired of being told what their views have to be and what they HAVE to do. And if you don't conform well you must be a bigoted monster, it's what a very loud minority of people are yelling about and being pandered too and it's gotten old. I believe in tolerance, you do you and accept others doing their own thing too. You don't have to like it, but you shouldn't be trying to punish or attack them for w/e they are or do. I really dislike religion but I have to tolerate and have some basic respect for people that practice even when their views are totally opposed to my own. Demanding more is not tolerance, you are just trying to bully people into compliance.

[Saraide]

Right wing politics is on the rise because people are frankly tired of being told what their views have to be and what they HAVE to do. And if you don't conform well you must be a bigoted monster, it's what a very loud minority of people are yelling about and being pandered too and it's gotten old. I believe in tolerance, you do you and accept others doing their own thing too. You don't have to like it, but you shouldn't be trying to punish or attack them for w/e they are or do. I really dislike religion but I have to tolerate and have some basic respect for people that practice even when their views are totally opposed to my own. Demanding more is not tolerance, you are just trying to bully people into compliance.

Lmao no, right wing politics are on the rise because there is so much money behind it to back it up which cascades in tons of different ways.

[RobynDaBank]

Lmao no, right wing politics are on the rise because there is so much money behind it to back it up which cascades in tons of different ways.

Haha, what? Just the right wing? Damn.

[Saraide]

Haha, what? Just the right wing? Damn.

You've described ALL politics. Not just right wing. Money and lobbyists behind the scenes have constituents arguing about stupid crap that are ultimately distractions as they make billions of dollars*

*See - Pfizer

I love how both of you just pretend I said "just the right wing". There is a lot more capital behind right wing politics however because the people and corporations with tons of money profit more of them. Capitalism has always favored right wing policies.

[LeonKeyh]

I love how both of you just pretend I said "just the right wing". There is a lot more capital behind right wing politics however because the people and corporations with tons of money profit more of them. Capitalism has always favored right wing policies.

1. I didn't claim that you said 'just' the right wing, I expanded upon your comment.
2. Your first and second sentence are at odds with each other "I didn't say it was so. But it is so." lol

"Only" about 65% of lobbying goes to right wing anymore. If we were about 20-25 years ago you'd be right, but we're not. Corporations learned that it's really easy to get the left on their side, just update their Twitter avatar every June and virtue signal. I can't believe the "right wing" is the one AGAINST corporations in the US.

Edit: Preemptive (maybe, depends on how long I took) sourcing:


https://www.opensecrets.org/federal-...top-recipients

6 of the top 10 Lobbying recipients are...Democrats. I'm fairly sure total cash value still leans republican, but it's not what it used to be.

[Saraide]

1. I didn't claim that you said 'just' the right wing, I expanded upon your comment.
2. Your first and second sentence are at odds with each other "I didn't say it was so. But it is so." lol

"Only" about 65% of lobbying goes to right wing anymore. If we were about 20-25 years ago you'd be right, but we're not. Corporations learned that it's really easy to get the left on their side, just update their Twitter avatar every June and virtue signal. I can't believe the "right wing" is the one AGAINST corporations in the US.

Edit: Preemptive (maybe, depends on how long I took) sourcing:


https://www.opensecrets.org/federal-...top-recipients

6 of the top 10 Lobbying recipients are...Democrats. I'm fairly sure total cash value still leans republican, but it's not what it used to be.

They're not against corporations, they're just unhappy with how far they are lagging behind the most insane and unhinged right wingers. I'm also unhappy to report that democrats are very much right leaning and love nothing more than to attack their own progressive wing. If they spent even half as much fervor on attacking republicans the democrats would win every major election forever against the republicans. This is why so many people in the US are so demoralized about voting. Nothing changes, the two parties are almost identical when it comes to actual policies and not just empty posturing.