Fallout: New Vegas tidbits

[otsego]

spe·cies·ism
There is no racism and there has never been racism in any of the Fallout games.

Most NPC's had something nasty to say about tribals and your tribal heritage in Fallout 2 didn't they? And it was pretty much unanimously negative.

 

[NiRv4n4]

Personally, I would not classify ghouls and super mutants as humans. Nor do I consider neanderthals humans, none of my peers do either, I might add.

Even if you do not consider the Neanderthals to be the same species as us (even though current evidence points to there being fertile interbreeding between them and the Homo sapiens sapiens and to 1–4% of the genome of people of Eurasia coming from Neanderthals), technically all members of the genus Homo are humans. What exactly is the definition of a species that you are using, then?

Actually, that does mean they are the same species. For example, a lion can breed with a tiger (liger), but lions and tigers are not the same species. To most, Homo Neanderthalensis and Homo Sapiens are different species. Of course, some do classify them as subsets (Homo Sapiens Neanderthalensis and Homo Sapiens Sapiens).

 

[Crni Vuk]

No, it's not a special trait exactly, but homosexuals will act in ways that distinguish them form heterosexuals, since they need to send signals to other homosexuals that they are, well, homosexual.

Good joke there. Really well. I AM not acting in different ways from heterosexual males. That you can be sure about.

And yet the majority of tribals are still hetero, just like in developed nations.
And aren't you basically saying that it's a choice, lol? "they try what they like and some stick with it"...

And no, it's not "natural" for them, unless you think that being forced to fuck a guy by your tribe is "natural". If that's natural, then forcing gays to fuck women in western societies is natural too.

People are born with genetic predisposition to be sexually attracted to either the opposite or the same gender. The majority get to be hetero and that's just how it is with humans.

So. I dont know what relevance that has except that its rare. If you believe Kinsey 90% (or so) of the human population are bisexual. What do I care.

I have no clue what "tribes" you are talking about but the ones I have seen in a documentation dont force their children in sexuality. As said. They (children) "try" it and they do what they like more. Where does that mean its a "choice" ? Heck I dont know what it is. What I say is they have no preasure by their society. They are not suddenly labelled by their community as "this" kind of person.

 

[randir14]

RE: Homosexuality...

It is very well handled in the game. Not surprising, considering who the Creative Director is...

Chris Avellone isn't gay, if that's what you're implying.

 

[gumbarrel]

[ I dont know what relevance that has except that its rare. If you believe Kinsey 90% (or so) of the human population are bisexual. What do I care.

I am confused by your English here. Are you saying that 90% of humans are bisexual? If that's what you are saying, you are wrong.

I have no clue what "tribes" you are talking about but the ones I have seen in a documentation dont force their children in sexuality. As said. They (children) "try" it and they do what they like more.

There was this one tribe that made their males have sex with the older members of the tribe, as a ritual to manhood. I thought you probably mistook those as "trying it"

They (children) "try" it and they do what they like more. Where does that mean its a "choice" ? Heck I dont know what it is. What I say is they have no preasure by their society. They are not suddenly labelled by their community as "this" kind of person.

Try what? How? They try having sex with both males and females and then stick with whatever they like? Is that what you are saying? Because that implies some sort of unbiased preference involved, where they could chose either one. A choice.

What I say is they have no preasure by their society. They are not suddenly labelled by their community as "this" kind of person.

As far as I know, pretty much every tribe has a label for people that prefer the same gender or the opposite. That doesn't mean that anyone is pressured or that there is anything wrong with that.

Labeling someone as "gay" for having sex with man is not wrong by itself. When you start applying gross generalizations to that label or when you use it as slur, that's when it gets bad

Are you worried when somebody labels you as a gamer, or Fallout fan? No, because you know that serves as nothing more than a description most of the time.

 

[KillerBee256]

In my mind Ghouls are just people with a horrable disease, in a way there not much different than lepers. super mutants are different enough that they are a bit harder, but when you get right down it they are mutant humans, nothing more nothing less.

 

[UncannyGarlic]

Also about the NCR soldiers being homophobic, I think that can be expected from a military organization, considering America's don't ask don't tell policy.

Not really, the US is an exception to the rule rather than the standard, most of the industrialized world doesn't care (the exception being those with religious governments).

No, it's not a special trait exactly, but homosexuals will act in ways that distinguish them form heterosexuals, since they need to send signals to other homosexuals that they are, well, homosexual.

Think about it - if you are gay, how are you going to attract other gays, unless you send at least a subtle hint?

Your naivety is painful, join the Gay Straight Alliance at your university and actually meet some gay and bi people. Not all homosexuals send out ways of gayness in order to attract other gay people, they use the same signals that straight people do.

Actually, that does mean they are the same species. For example, a lion can breed with a tiger (liger), but lions and tigers are not the same species. To most, Homo Neanderthalensis and Homo Sapiens are different species. Of course, some do classify them as subsets (Homo Sapiens Neanderthalensis and Homo Sapiens Sapiens).

What most people do or do not think means absolutely dick, what experts in the feild think is what matters. Those experts are saying that our old classification was wrong.

So. I dont know what relevance that has except that its rare. If you believe Kinsey 90% (or so) of the human population are bisexual. What do I care.

If you believe Kinsey then you use a 7 point scale (plus 1 for asexuality), and others suggest using deeper scales. Kinsey also believed that sexuality shifted around some over time.

I have no clue what "tribes" you are talking about but the ones I have seen in a documentation dont force their children in sexuality. As said. They (children) "try" it and they do what they like more. Where does that mean its a "choice" ? Heck I dont know what it is. What I say is they have no preasure by their society. They are not suddenly labelled by their community as "this" kind of person.

In other words, the cultures simply don't care which gender anyone has sex with which means that people end up fornicating with those they are most attracted to. (For gumbarrel)

As far as I know, pretty much every tribe has a label for people that prefer the same gender or the opposite. That doesn't mean that anyone is pressured or that there is anything wrong with that.

You are injecting your own assumptions and presumptions into how all cultures deal with sexuality and I'm willing to bet money that you're wrong. I suspect it all the more due to your demonstrated lack of knowledge about human sexuality so before you decide to continue this discussion I'd suggest that you do some reading starting with Kinsey.

 

[Ausir]

Actually, that does mean they are the same species. For example, a lion can breed with a tiger (liger), but lions and tigers are not the same species.

Ligers are infertile, unlike the offspring of Homo sapiens sapiens and Neanderthals, which is us. They were believed to be separate species when there was no proof of fertile offspring, and now only by some people who refuse to acknowledge new findings.

 

[Brother None]

Firstly it assumes that all raider tribes should have identical, parallel development that should lead to them having interchangeable social norms. This is ridiculous on the face of it.

Except that it's not just the raider tribes. The entirity of Fallout society ever, from BoS to Enclave to trading caravans to raiders to slavers, were post-sexist. Everyone. Everything. Except the Legion.

if you talk to Caesar he makes it clear that everything about the Legion is contrived in a highly specific way as part of his plan for it to merge with and be moderated by NCR.

Yes, the Legion is explained ingame, that doesn't mean it automatically fits. Do I need to keep repeating myself.

There's absolutely NOTHING like that in ANY fallout game ever.

No need to be smarmy. Besides, you're using a strawman. I said there are many reasons Caesar's Legion doesn't fit. The fact that they're a large warbound slaver guild is not one of them, never said it was. Way to counter an argument I never made.

How many anthropologists do you know?

Dunno. A dozen?

Do you think you know enough anthropologists to make a sweeping claim that they all disagree with my assessment of race - which you, quite frankly, do not know.

Well, good thing you took the opportunity to explain it, then.

Anthropologists generally oppose the classical concept of "race", or just your buddies?

Anthropology does have its set core ways, y'know. Mixing race and ethnicity is something I've never heard an anthropologist support. You could argue the local schools of anthropology over here are more Eliasian than US schools of thinking but that doesn't make much of an impact on race.

If tomorrow a fossilized skeleton of a Neanderthal-Sapien hybrid were found, there would still be a Homo sapien and Homo neanderthalensis. Just the same if say two creatures that can obviously reproduce, such as, oh Pan paniscus and Pan troglodytes, we can still see that they are both considered separate species, and will always.

Ok. What part of this paragraph proves biological taxonomy is well-fitted and useful for these rapid mutations?

it can hardly be lumped under the Trotskyite catch-word racism.

Ahahahaha, I'm sorry, but what? You can not be serious.

If I were to taxonomically define ghouls and super mutants.

Heh. Ausir already shot this down, I guess.

Which is a flaw in Fallout's design (in my opinion) but is explained very well by the gameplay : as far as choice and consequences go, your initial choice of sex and color has to have no impact on the difficulty of the game and the only way to do that is by removing sexism and racism from the universe.

Except that you couldn't play anything other than caucasian in the original Fallouts.

Most NPC's had something nasty to say about tribals and your tribal heritage in Fallout 2 didn't they? And it was pretty much unanimously negative.

That's not racism though, that's cultural discrimination, like islamophobia.

Chris Avellone isn't gay, if that's what you're implying.

He's also not the creative director. John Gonzalez was.

I know Tess Treadwell is gay but I dunno about anyone else over at Obsidian. Can't say I care that much either.

 

[gumbarrel]

Your naivety is painful, join the Gay Straight Alliance at your university and actually meet some gay and bi people. Not all homosexuals send out ways of gayness in order to attract other gay people, they use the same signals that straight people do.

Thing is that it's very different depending on the person. Some will act in that flamboyant way, some will have a slightly modified speech, but some will act exactly like straight males, only showing their sexuality during conversations oe in private, regardless of the acceptance of homosexuality in their society. I didn't mean that they will lisp, or talk about fashion or something like that.

My point was, that at the end of the day, your sexuality will play a part in how you act, which some people prefer to denie. I don't care if someone is gay so even if he acts like the most stereotypical flaming queen, i won't be bothered, since I don't find that wrong.

Also: http://www.unl.edu/rhames/courses/readings/homofinger/homo_finger.html

You are injecting your own assumptions and presumptions into how all cultures deal with sexuality and I'm willing to bet money that you're wrong.

I am not injecting anything, that is based on what I've read about different tribes and their language and social hierarchies.

 

[Crni Vuk]

I am confused by your English here. Are you saying that 90% of humans are bisexual? If that's what you are saying, you are wrong.

Sorry about that though. And not I am saying it KINSEY is I think in one of his reports ~ though cant find the part anymore about the bisexuality. But since he is a very controversial character anyway ... BUT he did some interesting research. So much for sure. And what it shows is that sexuality is a extremly complex topic and that neither homo nor heterosexuality is really understood particularly in such a social complex creature like humans. There are a lot of ideas about it. But nothing that can be proven.

I have no clue what "tribes" you are talking about but the ones I have seen in a documentation dont force their children in sexuality. As said. They (children) "try" it and they do what they like more. Where does that mean its a "choice" ? Heck I dont know what it is. What I say is they have no preasure by their society. They are not suddenly labelled by their community as "this" kind of person.

In other words, the cultures simply don't care which gender anyone has sex with which means that people end up fornicating with those they are most attracted to. (For gumbarrel)

exactly. More or less. In their community its not seen as abnormal as they dont heven have words which describe homosexuality or heterosexuality. Strange enough they dont even have words for "good" or "bad". I wish I could remember which community it was.

The thing is that our society as we know it in the western world creates a hell lot of preasure when it comes to sexuality. For example lesbianism while "kinky" is "ok" (see countless music videos) while male homosexuality is a "no go".

Families with "usual" and "natural" relationships male, female in a marriage with kidz and a nice small house are seen as the highest value and target. Even in states that do allow a gay marriage they are still seperated in one form or another by the state which means that its still "different" ~ and many times they dont have the same rights like a traditional couple which shows when one of them dies or as best example regarding adoptions. I never was a fan of "gay laws" which grants them now for example some protection or what ever. Why not just threat it like human beeings ? If the church doesnt allow gay marriages thats alright one HAS to respect that because the church is a independ organisation and they can choose their own rules for it. But the gouvernement should not seperate its people. A marriage should be a marriage and a gay couple should have the same rights like a heterosexual couple infront of the court. Yet even in Germany which is very liberal regarding homosexuality this is not that way.

Labeling someone as "gay" for having sex with man is not wrong by itself. When you start applying gross generalizations to that label or when you use it as slur, that's when it gets bad

Different communities deal differently with it. Certain native american tribes called them two-spirt or something but here it is hard to make a line between clear homesexuals or those people which feel like a male traped in a female body or males which like to dress and act like females (known in our society as "drag queen") etc. Many times those people have been not labeled in a negative way though and seen as touched by a god or higher spirit making them a shaman or something like that. Though even in those tribes many times homosexuality was not seen as abnomination. It was not uncommon for the male elders to teach the younger boys sexuality with homosexuality. This was as well practiced by ancient greek warriors and even the Samurai with their students. At some point parents would even give their children to a very reputable Samurai acting as teacher and he would as well teach his apprentice not just in the art of war but as well in sexual rites. Even the ancient roman culture knew such kind of teacher-student relations. Though it was much less about sexuality (anal sex was seen as abject in the roman culture) but the relation was between males was seen as a form of deep friendship which could as well include sexuality or a relationship. As said different cultures deal differently with it. The way how homosexualty was seen in the ancient Japanese culture changed dramaticaly for example with the arise of western powers in their society.

Thing is we have our own ideals and moral concept. And only cause a society has a name for something doesnt mean they deal with it the same way as we do or think about it the same way. I think its not far away to say that discrimination is not a natural ocurance as in nature there is a seperation (by nature itself) but never a discrimination for example by the pack or group. A pack of wolfes would never discriminate another wolf cause he has shorter ears or a longer snout for example. To say that as well it is a peculiar human trait to label everything and give everything a name or classification. Even if it doesnt make always sense.

 

[NiRv4n4]

Actually, that does mean they are the same species. For example, a lion can breed with a tiger (liger), but lions and tigers are not the same species.

Ligers are infertile, unlike the offspring of Homo sapiens sapiens and Neanderthals, which is us. They were believed to be separate species when there was no proof of fertile offspring, and now only by some people who refuse to acknowledge new findings.

Nope, they aren't infertile. Ligers can breed with a lion, a tiger, or even another liger.

 

[DocConrad]

Lets Start A War!

 

[UncannyGarlic]

Nope, they aren't infertile. Ligers can breed with a lion, a tiger, or even another liger.

From what I gather, fertile ligers (and tiglons) are rare, hence why they aren't a new species. There are sometimes fertile female mules as well, but they too are extremely rare. Also note that the lions and tigers are separate species also because they do not ever interact in nature, giving them no chance to interbreed.

 

[Ausir]

He's also not the creative director. John Gonzalez was.

John Gonzalez is the lead creative designer on FNV, while MCA is the creative director of Obsidian, so I'm pretty sure he meant MCA. Not that this matters anyhow.

 

[Brother None]

Well, I'd certainly like to know if MCA is a homosexual. It'd be the best news I had in years!



Lucious manbeef!

 

[SharkClub]

Well, I'd certainly like to know if MCA is a homosexual. It'd be the best news I had in years!



Lucious manbeef!

 

[Diomedes20]

Well, I'd certainly like to know if MCA is a homosexual. It'd be the best news I had in years!



Lucious manbeef!

I specifically remember that there was an interview with MCA concerning FNV posted on this site where he mentioned having a girlfriend. So I guess he's just effeminate.

Found it: http://dualshockers.com/2010/09/28/interview-chris-avellone-on-fallout-new-vegas/

 

[Brother None]

I specifically remember that there was an interview with MCA concerning FNV posted on this site where he mentioned having a girlfriend.

Mass Codex suicide!

 

[TheWesDude]

no, they wont suicide, but it explains why he never goes to the codex anymore

well that and his life amounts to be worth more than a short stack of $1 bills

of course mine is starting to head that right so i may be ostracized from there soon but i can always come here eh