Marriage feedback [inofficial Poll]

[Jynx]

My words will clearly upset people, and I won't apologies for them. I simply want the game to be just that, a game. Such seriousness just is a waste of time

Can't say I've been following this thread from my last departure from it a few days ago but I will point this out.

Video games are not just "Games" and what you find to be a waste of time may be extremly engaging to another. I respect your opinion but I couldn't disagree more with games not being a media form to not take seriously. It's as misleading as calling a book "Just a book" or a movie, "Just a movie".

Video games (MMOs in particular) generally allow people a medium they can freely express themselves (To a extent) For the most part the normal worlds laws, rules, reasoning don't follow us into the game world. While we may outselves apply our real world morals and whatnot to our characters it's something we ourselves do and can just as easilly abandon.

While I'm a avid advocate that we only speak for ourselves and how we feel the game should develope (You expressing you think a marriage system is something you would not engage in or enjoy). I am also a advocate of not speaking down to others just because I don't agree with them (Calling it a waste of time, and not worth the time of day).

To sum it up, just because you don't feel it's a good system doesn't mean it isn't something very important to others and that opinion should be respected not made fun of.

[Keisuna]

In the context of what I said, when a same sex couple hosts a wedding party in a country where they cannot legally marry, not here is not a marriage document. Under the law they are not a legally married couple. What I have said is that the lack of that document does not stop them from having a wedding, sharing their union with their friends and family, having a great big party, and then going on with their lives.

With modern marriages, the only difference is that document and that it tells the government 2 entities have become one and are now taxed differently.

A marriage, and a wedding, can be 2 completely different things.

Ah, I see what you mean, but being legally married isn't just about taxes. It's also about being able to be seen by the law as the legal parent of your children, or being able to visit your spouse in the hospital, or make medical decisions for them when they're unable.

But most importantly it's about the union being recognized by the governing authority. You can have the biggest wedding in the world, and yet feel like your relationship is attacked by society as illegitimate because it isn't recognized by the law like 'normal' marriages are. That's kind of why I hated FFXI's restricting marriage to opposite gender couples, because the GMs, part of the governing authority in the game, officiated over it, and you had physical evidence in the form of a ring.

That's why many people feel it's important to have gay and straight marriage be equal. It doesn't matter if the water tastes the same and comes from the same place, the fact that you're forced to drink from one fountain and forbidden from another for no good reason is still a strong social message that you are inferior, and don't deserve to be treated as truly equal.

[Talshara_Blade]

Humanity just sucks... it's ashamed that people as a whole can't just keep their nose out of other people's business.

[RosenKreuz]

I am all for equal rights in the real world. However "gay" couples can and do adopt and are viewed as legal parents. Hospitals can be informed of same sex couples legal or otherwise to allow entrance. And medical decisions do not require a marriage, they require a power of attorney which can be sought out from any lawyer for about $100 and it does not matter the relation of the person you are giving power of attorney to.

Since 2009 the marriage system in FFXI has been open and is no longer GM officiated. You can buy rings from a box in the starting cities, as well as the wedding gear. And even then the ability to sign rings means you could pick any ring to craft (permitting you had gold smithing) to sign your name to and give to your spouse to be so you were no longer limited to a wedding band.

But this isn't real life anyway. This is a game. And as I have said if the legalities and sentiments attached to "marriage" are a problem for the general masses, then do away with the idea of it being a marriage. There will be no children, there is no legal ramifications or need for power of attorney in the game (unless you really need a raise and the whm is demanding to know your relationship status to the KO'd).

Which brings us back to same-sex couples still have weddings. A wedding is not a marriage. It is just a ceremony and party celebrating the lives of 2 people and the part of it they share. So why not let all the happy little pixels wear tuxedos and dresses, let those who care to show that they care about another human being have their fun, and call it a day?

[Kallivis]

In this game, I don't think, since most guys end up playing female characters anyway, that same sex marriage is necessary.
So personally I vote no, But really don't care either way.

So if a guy is playing a female character and his girlfriend is playing a female character they can't get married in the game.

Logical.

[Zyph]

It's also about being able to be seen by the law as the legal parent of your children

All of a sudden it's so clear. The reason why SE's only allowing opposite sex marriage.

New mini game: Child Raising.

It'll be like a cross between Chocobo raising from XI and Chao raising from Sonic Adventure.

Shit you can even race 'em.

[Zantetsuken]

I don't know where you're going with this, but I'll bite.

Generally speaking, laws against activities that don't cause harm are there because they are seen to drastically increase the chance that said harm would happen. Traffic laws are a good example of this. It doesn't matter if you can run a red light without causing a wreck. If they allowed you to just drive through red lights without any penalty so long as you don't cause harm, more people would run red lights, drastically increasing the chances of wrecks in intersections.

From the standpoint of the law, it doesn't necessarily matter that the subjects of the voyeurism didn't know, as the act of voyeurism itself drastically increases the chance that the subjects might find out. If the law only busted those who were caught by the subjects themselves, it would encourage more people to do it, thus drastically increasing the chances of it happening.

These restrictions on activity that increase the chance of harm are made with reason in mind, as technically just going out of your house drastically increases the chance of creating harm. They have to keep in mind that people have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and all that, and the law aims to prevent infringements on life and property of everyone in the best way that it can.

Now, would you please PLEASE get to your point. I'm really sick of seeing these posts about voyeurism.

A fine answer...

And it underlines why many people strongly against calling gay-unions 'Marriages'

Marriage (traditionally understood) has long been an institution in which two people agree to sexual excusivity. This can be for romantic reasons, or for the purpose of providing the ideal structure for the propitiation of the species, or both. It creates offspring via the sexual activity of its partners, who are biologically inclined to care for the children more than any others. It also harnesses the complementary attributes of both sexes to create the best and most balanced environment for their offspring to grow and thrive in. The couple's lives are largely dedicated the raising to their offspring. [*all other factors being equal]


Same-Sex Marriage is an agreement of sexual and romantic exclusivity between two people of the same gender. Barring any extra-marital sources of pregnancy, as long as the sexual activity (of any sort) is exclusive between the two partners, there is no chance for offspring. The couple lives are largely focused on each-other. [*all other factors being equal]

Now when an authoritative body declares that same-sex unions believe that a man-man or woman-woman union are "marriages", and therefore EQUAL in all manner to that of a traditional marriage, they have simultaneously also declared that the biological bond between parent and child, the value of procreation, and the complementary nature of the sexes effectively meaningless in the eyes of the law, which means that schools will teach it as such, and religious organizations, businesses are often penalized, fined, or sued if they do not comply with legislation that requires them to act in a certain way in regards to married people.

Even though most people wouldn't be able to describe it this way to you if you asked, intuitively they know it and it calls for gay 'marriage' is a severe affront to them.

Of course, many straight people fail to live up to the ideal, and we all know of cases of abuse, divorce, infidelity, etc.. but gay relationships experience those things just as much - so it's a wash there.

The wider social implications of calling gay unions 'marriages' is the key to the opposition.

You may not agree, but the issue is a very serious one with many people.

[Zyph]

Now when an authoritative body declares that same-sex unions believe that a man-man or woman-woman union are "marriages", and therefore EQUAL in all manner to that of a traditional marriage, they have simultaneously also declared that the biological bond between parent and child, the value of procreation, and the complementary nature of the sexes effectively meaningless in the eyes of the law.

Again, it's a video game. Unless SE decides so implement my TOTALLY AWESOME idea above, the biological bonds you speak of and the idea of procreation are meaningless. Context plays a role in this too.

[Zantetsuken]

Again, it's a video game. Unless SE decides so implement my TOTALLY AWESOME idea above, the biological bonds you speak of and the idea of procreation are meaningless. Context plays a role in this too.

Its not JUST a video game having gay marriages...

Its a game company that is making a volatile political/cultural statement.


but yeah, I agree with the fact that gay marriage is equal(ly stupid) to straight marriage in FFXIV.

[Wynn]

A fine answer...

And it underlines why many people strongly against calling gay-unions 'Marriages'

Marriage (traditionally understood) has long been an institution in which two people agree to sexual excusivity. This can be for romantic reasons, or for the purpose of providing the ideal structure for the propitiation of the species, or both. It creates offspring via the sexual activity of its partners, who are biologically inclined to care for the children more than any others. It also harnesses the complementary attributes of both sexes to create the best and most balanced environment for their offspring to grow and thrive in. The couple's lives are largely dedicated the raising to their offspring. [*all other factors being equal]


Same-Sex Marriage is an agreement of sexual and romantic exclusivity between two people of the same gender. Barring any extra-marital sources of pregnancy, as long as the sexual activity (of any sort) is exclusive between the two partners, there is no chance for offspring. The couple lives are largely focused on each-other. [*all other factors being equal]

Now when an authoritative body declares that same-sex unions believe that a man-man or woman-woman union are "marriages", and therefore EQUAL in all manner to that of a traditional marriage, they have simultaneously also declared that the biological bond between parent and child, the value of procreation, and the complementary nature of the sexes effectively meaningless in the eyes of the law, which means that schools will teach it as such, and religious organizations, businesses are often penalized, fined, or sued if they do not comply with legislation that requires them to act in a certain way in regards to married people.

Even though most people wouldn't be able to describe it this way to you if you asked, intuitively they know it and it calls for gay 'marriage' is a severe affront to them.

Of course, many straight people fail to live up to the ideal, and we all know of cases of abuse, divorce, infidelity, etc.. but gay relationships experience those things just as much - so it's a wash there.

The wider social implications of calling gay unions 'marriages' is the key to the opposition.

You may not agree, but the issue is a very serious one with many people.

This is not valid. You want to know why? A man and woman can get married legally even if one or both of them is infertile or otherwise incapable of having children. The law does not see marriage as a contract, or even an obligation, to breed.

If this is truly the argument against same-sex marriage then all marriages in which no children are produced, or in which the children are no longer living at home or being raised, should be recinded immediately until such time that children are once again being brought forth from the couple. One child a year, no exceptions.

And what about gay people that adopt or have children that came from a former straight marriage or otherwise? They are rearing children but still being denied the right to marry the partner who is also rearing those children. Flawed argument is flawed.

But just to put this back into XIV territory, no children are possible here no matter what genders we are talking about so whatever other ridiculous arguments people are going to come up with here against marriage equality should have a firm basis in the game.