That's a homosexual AND intermodel couple!

Wow! Such vitriol!

Here's the thing: Nobody has any right to not be offended. People say sh*tty things. That's just how it is. You can avoid them or ask them to stop. Should you go around being a jerk just because you can? No, but unless you actually harm somebody you have the right to have your views. Does it suck that there are ignorant people? Yep! But a verbal beating's not going to convert people and open hearts.

But a verbal beating's not going to convert people and open hearts.

This is not specifically directed at you because I agree with some of the other things you're saying, but it's about the millionth time it's been brought up in this thread and your post was the most convenient thing to quote and I think it needs to be said without any kid gloves:

I don't give really a shite about changing minds. I do give a shite about refusing to be tone-policed by the privileged.

*cue stupid "anti-SJW" or whatever furor*

It's that the pandering's gotten so out-of-control...

I have seen no evidence of any such pandering.

Hell, in the University of Arizona, Tucson...

We were talking about how the inclusion of a previously excluded group was a nice-to-have thing. Not about the advertising practices of some no-name coffee shop.

Sadly, it's really the too-vocal minority on both sides that squeezes those who just don't care and only want to live our lives.

False-equivalence. The "too-vocal minority" on one side asks that people stop excluding an entire classification of people and voices their approval at examples of inclusion. The "too-vocal minority" on the other side asks that the rest of society continue excluding an entire classification of people and voices their disapproval at examples of inclusion.

One side seeks to stop harm. The other side seeks to preserve harm. These two are not the same.

Alderaan Crumbs, you are not a bad person. You aren't choosing to do bad things to people. But injustice isn't simply good people choosing to not do bad things. Injustice is when good people choose to not speak out against bad things and instead let those bad things continue.

But a verbal beating's not going to convert people and open hearts.

This is not specifically directed at you because I agree with some of the other things you're saying, but it's about the millionth time it's been brought up in this thread and your post was the most convenient thing to quote and I think it needs to be said without any kid gloves:

I don't give really a shite about changing minds. I do give a shite about refusing to be tone-policed by the privileged.

The "privileged"? What's that? It smacks of ignorant, playbook, SJW stupidity. I love how some group feels broadstroked and gets mad. Then they broadstroke who they feel is attacking them and when it's pointed out as hypocritical, they throw out little safe words like "privileged". These stupid, little phrases do more to exclude minorities and marginalize than they do help.

Why do I bring this up? I've been told I'm privileged because I'm a straight...sorry "cis"...white, male who can't possibly understand bigotry. Why? Because I'm white I've never been treated like **** by blacks or hispanics? The Army is full of racial cliques and I've been treated like crap simply because I'm white. And who's fault has it been? Mine, apparently, simply for being white.

I've never been given anything because I'm white. In fact, in the "color-blind" Army I've seen women pass men over for promotion when they're less qualified. You get points for that. And before you talk about fairness and equality between men and women (if you were about to do so), please tell me why, if men and women are equal, the physical fitness standards for women are lower than for men. Or why, in the U.S., women don't have to register for Selective Service but men do. I've yet to see a crusade to remove those benefits, but I hear a lot about male privilege. That's just an easy example of how trying to embrace equality fails and only points out the differences. (And before anyone gets uppity about me being a mysoginist, I'll say that I have no problem with women in the military. Some if the best troops I worked with were women.)

I've seen a lot of random hate toward the "privileged" based on the nothing more than assumptions and stereotypes, but if it's ever done to minorities, it's now a racist/homophobic (a stupid word as not agreeing with homosexuality doesn't make you phobic)/bigoted. "We want to be accepted but please, treat us as special!" is confusing and frustrating.

The point is that everyone can be ignorant and your gender, color or religion doesn't give you* some protected status. It doesn't make you* special and it certainly doesn't give you* the right to judge others. *the general "You", not you as an individual. You're going to be hurt, made fun of and poked at because people do that and for the dumbest of reasons. But please don't scream about inclusion and acceptance then spew crap like "privilege".

Well that escalated quickly.

It's that the pandering's gotten so out-of-control...

I have seen no evidence of any such pandering.

Hell, in the University of Arizona, Tucson...

We were talking about how the inclusion of a previously excluded group was a nice-to-have thing. Not about the advertising practices of some no-name coffee shop.

Sadly, it's really the too-vocal minority on both sides that squeezes those who just don't care and only want to live our lives.

False-equivalence. The "too-vocal minority" on one side asks that people stop excluding an entire classification of people and voices their approval at examples of inclusion. The "too-vocal minority" on the other side asks that the rest of society continue excluding an entire classification of people and voices their disapproval at examples of inclusion.

One side seeks to stop harm. The other side seeks to preserve harm. These two are not the same.

Alderaan Crumbs, you are not a bad person. You aren't choosing to do bad things to people. But injustice isn't simply good people choosing to not do bad things. Injustice is when good people choose to not speak out against bad things and instead let those bad things continue.

Other cases I've seen is that big deal about a homosexual football player in the NFL. When I heard about it I didn't care. His life and all. But then it went on and on and on. Another player didn't agree with him being homosexual and he was attacked. That's wrong. If he was beating him up, doing things in game to make things harder for him, fine. But this "YOU MUST ACCEPT ME OR ELSE YOU ARE A NAZI!!!" bit has to stop. If I (and I don't) disliked homosexuals and decided to boycott the Star Wars book that doesn't make me a bad person. It means I have views and an opinion and have a right to them.

As a straight, white male I'm bombarded with how bad I am because of being straight, white or male. I don't hurt anybody and am a pretty tolerant and charitable person. But I am tired of inclusion being used as a bludgeon and not being able have an opinion that's discounted because I'm a straight, white male.

For example, I think Obama's a terrible President, but almost anytime I've had a discussion about it, it's assumed I don't like him because he's black. That's ignorant. I dislike his white half, too. I feel he's an awful President because of how he acts and his policies.

I get dismissed out-of-hand on many topics because I'm a straight, white male. When that's been pointed out it's all-too-often met with a "See how it feels?" revenge-vibe. How is that helpful? That's the screaming, broadstroking I referred to.

Well that escalated quickly.

It's been escalated! I'm not trying to piss anybody off, but I'm not going to be quiet when assumptions are attacked with more assumptions.

Well that escalated quickly.

It's been escalated! I'm not trying to piss anybody off, but I'm not going to be quiet when assumptions are attacked with more assumptions.

Not trying?

I'm driving home so I'll be quick. You're probably about to get a flood of responses from many other people. They're not going to be anti-your-race or anti-your-orientation.

They're going to be anti-your-attitude.

I guess this thread is done for. Anyone care to start another where we can continue loving this game, this franchise, and these books?

The "privileged"? What's that? It smacks of ignorant, playbook, SJW stupidity.

Called it.

Not all men etc.

I get dismissed out-of-hand on many topics because I'm a straight, white male. When that's been pointed out it's all-too-often met with a "See how it feels?" revenge-vibe. How is that helpful? That's the screaming, broadstroking I referred to.

I'm a straight white male, and never had such issues. I think maybe you aren't even aware of the entitlement and benefits you appear to be taking for granted. Perfect example:

Other cases I've seen is that big deal about a homosexual football player in the NFL. When I heard about it I didn't care. His life and all. But then it went on and on and on. Another player didn't agree with him being homosexual and he was attacked. That's wrong. If he was beating him up, doing things in game to make things harder for him, fine. But this "YOU MUST ACCEPT ME OR ELSE YOU ARE A NAZI!!!" bit has to stop. If I (and I don't) disliked homosexuals and decided to boycott the Star Wars book that doesn't make me a bad person. It means I have views and an opinion and have a right to them.

The reason it went "on and on" is because lots of people *do* care. You're ignoring all the history that allowed society to finally have a majority that does not care, and ignoring the social and political power of those remaining that hate the idea of homosexual football players. They are loud and vocal. When people like you put the onus for the tension on the struggling minority because you don't want to think about it, you're basically complicit in the continuation of minority oppression.

I'd suggest your views aren't discounted because of your skin color and gender, but because you clearly have no regard for, or interest in, anybody else's struggle and the context which informs it.

So what if people care? Did he get booted from the NFL? As far as I no, he didn't. And what if he ends up being an awful player? What happens when somebody tries to can him? Cries of anti-homosexual bigotry.

Look, I'm not saying that prejudice doesn't happen but that it can happen to everyone, not just minorities. To spout about unseen privelege is ridiculous and no excuse to hammer anyone. I could very easily say that the reason an absolutely terrible employee in my company was never fired because he was Native American. What's that? "Native privilege"? Why can I say that? Because HE said it,mand it's true.

I wasn't around to own slaves, butcher natives or hang homosexuals. I have, however, been around long enough to see unqualified people catered to because of color and gender. But nobody wants to see that. They just want to cling to and spout about the past as if it happened to them, using any slight ever, to put others back in their places because of "privilege", no matter how accepting said people are. It's like getting revenge and doing back to somebody else somehow makes it better.

The frustrating thing is how one-sided the argument is and that all somebody has to do is scream "RACIST!" or "HOMOPHOBE!" and any sane discussion's shut down.

So, a person slurs a homosexual simply for being one and is attacked. Fine. That needs to be called out. But what if a minority slurs a straight, white male for no reason? Why is that covered by "privilege" and turned around? I hear time and again about the woes of minorities and when it's founded, I truly feel for them. Nobody should be treated poorly. But when my life experiences are discounted because of my "privilege" and excuses are given that's unacceptable.

Know what happened to me once? A homosexual who was at a party I was at grabbed my crotch and when I said not to do that, they brushed it off and laughed and tried it again. I told them if they touched me again I was going to punch them. They got mad, called me a homophobe and made me out to be some homosexual-bashing jerk. Did I let that one instance inform my opinion? Not at all. I've been assaulted for being white, with no provocation. Again, I don't blame every black person I see. In both instances people have made excuses as to why I was in the wrong. Why is it OK to make excuses or brush off what's happened to me or lump me in as "privileged" based on the very little anyone knows without dealing with people as individuals with very real and different experiences?

Actually, this entire thread is shut down because, for some reason, you keep making this about yourself.

Know what happened to me once? A homosexual who was at a party I was at grabbed my crotch and when I said not to do that, they brushed it off and laughed and tried it again. I told them if they touched me again I was going to punch them. They got mad, called me a homophobe and made me out to be some homosexual-bashing jerk. Did I let that one instance inform my opinion? Not at all. I've been assaulted for being white, with no provocation. Again, I don't blame every black person I see. In both instances people have made excuses as to why I was in the wrong. Why is it OK to make excuses or brush off what's happened to me or lump me in as "privileged" based on the very little anyone knows without dealing with people as individuals with very real and different experiences?

Hey dude, sorry you were bullied. I have no tolerance for that either nor condone it.

I'm not quite sure what it has to do with showing LGBT life in a normal light so that those that associate with it don't feel like outcasts. No one should feel that way. People should be encouraged to enjoy life in the best way that they can. People need to see that their choices are just as normal as the "straight" choices. One way is to show its normalcy in various media. I am proud to say I have seen many of those changes over the last almost 50 years. I think there is still room for improvement but we have come a long way in that time.

Know what happened to me once? A homosexual who was at a party I was at grabbed my crotch and when I said not to do that, they brushed it off and laughed and tried it again. I told them if they touched me again I was going to punch them. They got mad, called me a homophobe and made me out to be some homosexual-bashing jerk. Did I let that one instance inform my opinion? Not at all. I've been assaulted for being white, with no provocation. Again, I don't blame every black person I see. In both instances people have made excuses as to why I was in the wrong. Why is it OK to make excuses or brush off what's happened to me or lump me in as "privileged" based on the very little anyone knows without dealing with people as individuals with very real and different experiences?

Nobody is making excuses for those things (both of which experiences you've described I've also shared, though probably handled it differently). Just because somebody is a minority doesn't mean they automatically know what the boundaries are or (weirdly, to my mind) automatically have any tolerance for other minorities. More proof that "people are just people". If you think people *are* making excuses, then I'd have to say you're inventing a rationale and yes, indeed, based on your attitude you *are* letting those instances (and the aftermath) inform your opinion.

I admit to a bias though, because I have little tolerance for white hetero males in western society playing the victim card.

Anyway, none of this has anything to do with a Star Wars book that portrays an Imperial who happens to be a lesbian, and I see no problem normalizing it in the media.

A round of applause for mouthymerc and kshatriya up there.

Personally, I think it's a sorry state of affairs that the publisher even feels the need to mention that their book includes a character who's a lesbian - in much the same way I find it regrettable that people are still expected to "come out", as if it should be a big deal. We live in a diverse society and any franchise that hopes to stay relevant has an obligation to represent as wide a cultural demographic as possible. If anyone has a grievance with that, then they're a social dinosaur.

The publisher didn't mention it at all - a pre-release review of the book by an independent 3rd party did.

A round of applause for mouthymerc and kshatriya up there.

Personally, I think it's a sorry state of affairs that the publisher even feels the need to mention that their book includes a character who's a lesbian - in much the same way I find it regrettable that people are still expected to "come out", as if it should be a big deal. We live in a diverse society and any franchise that hopes to stay relevant has an obligation to represent as wide a cultural demographic as possible. If anyone has a grievance with that, then they're a social dinosaur.

The publisher didn't mention it at all - a pre-release review of the book by an independent 3rd party did.

Ah. Yes, well... erm...

Star wars characters do not engage in sex

Star wars characters do not engage in sex

Better to say that they shouldn't, since the the Solo kids certainly came out to bad ends. Not sure about Luke's kid.

Padme would agree...

Vaguely tangential to the topic at hand:

Gencon considering relocating from Indiana if gay discrimination law passes

Perhaps they'll move somewhere closer to the west coast so I can attend.

Vaguely tangential to the topic at hand:

Gencon considering relocating from Indiana if gay discrimination law passes

Perhaps they'll move somewhere closer to the west coast so I can attend.

I'm glad they're sticking by the principles of Gencon.

Vaguely tangential to the topic at hand:

Gencon considering relocating from Indiana if gay discrimination law passes

Perhaps they'll move somewhere closer to the west coast so I can attend.

You would think capitalism would outweigh the "moral" high-ground but I am never surprised nor disappointed just how stupid and ignorant some people can be. It may be time for the con to move.

FYI, GenCon is contractually obligated to hold it there until 2020.