Not even Star Wars can escape the “force” of the gay community!
The makers of the online Star Wars computer game, Star Wars: The Old Republic, have introduced a gay planet to the game. On “Makeb,” men, women, and even aliens engage in same-sex relationships.
BioWare, the Canadian studio responsible for making the game, said they decided to add the gay planet due to pressure from gay players. But executive producer Jeff Hickman also claims that “allowing same gender romance is something we are very supportive of” and plan to add more same-gender options in the future.
Apparently, a lot of gay players are still dissatisfied because they gay characters are segregated from the rest of the galaxy. Apparently gays will not be happy until the entire Star Wars universe is filled with gay people!
P.S. For full disclosure, I stole the first part of my headline from The Sun. It was just too good not to use! Of course, the Daily Mail’s “Darth Gaydar” was tempting too.
News sources:
Fox News
The Sun
Breitbart
Daily Mail
Thinking to Believe 
January 16, 2013 at 10:35 pm
I’m about to unsubscribe from this blog if you keep posting garbage like this. And why is it tagged as “apologetics?”
LikeLike
January 16, 2013 at 11:02 pm
Stan,
You’re free to unsubscribe if you wish, but I don’t understand what garbage it is that you are talking about. Is it the fact that I make posts that oppose homosex? Or is the lighthearted nature of this post? Can one not inject a bit of humor into an otherwise tense issue?
Jason
LikeLike
January 17, 2013 at 4:40 am
I don’t really see this as an issue apart from the community still not being happy (I wonder if they’ll ever be happy?) On an aside, I always thought these sorts of scenarios in the games were already available. You can have same-sex marriage of sorts in Skyrim, and I’m sure in previous Star Wars games you could progress storylines approaching the sexual attraction between 2 female characters at least…
LikeLike
January 17, 2013 at 7:28 am
Wow. A private company decided to do something. WE MUST STOP THEM!
Right? Because that’s how we feel? That private companies shouldn’t be allowed to do things, right?
LikeLike
January 17, 2013 at 9:51 am
Jason, the Daily Mail is one of the most notorious sources of transparent yellow journalism. Their job is to take an existing controversy and trump it up with vague references and unquoted, exaggerating paraphrases.
In this case, they’re clearly trying to imply that the developer is being bullied by various gay groups into implementing same-sex relationships.
But the developer has been wanting to do gay characters in TOR for a long time. Ray Muyzka, Bioware co-founder, said that same-sex relationships should be “part of the expectation of a role-playing game, [and] part of the expectation of a BioWare game.” Bioware games like Mass Effect (first released 5 years ago) and Dragon Age have same-sex options. The only reason it’s been difficult on TOR is because TOR, unlike traditional MMOs, has a ton of voice acting, making it a large production burden to support both heterosexual and homosexual situations.
You then read this article from the Daily Mail (good grief dude, don’t read that trash) and decide to parrot its spin: “Not even Star Wars can escape the ‘force’ of the gay community! … BioWare, the Canadian studio responsible for making the game, said they decided to add the gay planet due to pressure from gay players.”
Furthermore, it’s not a “gay planet.” They are adding a new planet, and have decided to put work into adding some gay NPCs on that planet.
So here are my suggestions to you:
1) Stop reading the Daily Mail. It’s the National Enquirer, but worse, of the UK. It’s a yellow tabloid that nobody respects because it’s terrible, but sells because it’s dishonest and incendiary and in check-out aisles.
2) Read legitimate sources of news when these stories break, like on Ars Technica.
3) If you do read The Daily Mail, don’t gleefully echo their trash on your blog. You are adding more tension to a tense issue when you do this, because The Daily Mail’s hyperbole and “creativity” are designed to generate more drama than actually exists.
4) Don’t file these things under “Apologetics.”
LikeLike
January 17, 2013 at 10:20 am
NotAScientist,
Who said anything about stopping them from doing anything? I just think its sad to introduce a hot-button cultural issue into the world of Star Wars.
Jason
LikeLike
January 17, 2013 at 10:21 am
Stan,
Let’s assume you are right, and that BioWare would have added gay characters even if they were not petitioned from gay fans to do so. So what? It still remains a stupid move to make. It’s motivated by social and political correctness, and does nothing to advance the Star Wars storyline. What’s next, polygamous marriages? C’mon! This is not what Star Wars has ever been about.
The Daily Mail is not the only source, btw.
You really have a thing for how I filed this, don’t you? While I don’t think I should have to justify my own tags, let me explain it to you. All of my posts are grouped under two main categories: apologetics, theology. With the exception of a few outliers, all of my tags are subsets of these categories. Homosexuality is a subset of the apologetics tag, so whenever I tag homosexuality, it will include apologetics.
Jason
LikeLike
January 17, 2013 at 11:04 am
” I just think its sad to introduce a hot-button cultural issue into the world of Star Wars. ”
Why sad? Making the Star Wars universe more real makes it better. And despite your particular desires, gay people exist. And nothing about the game means you have to play a gay character.
LikeLike
January 17, 2013 at 2:41 pm
NotAScientist,
If I wanted science fiction to model the real world, I wouldn’t want science fiction! It’s not intended to model our world.
And just because homosexuality is real does not mean it belongs in a fantasy world or any other “this-worldly” game for that matter. Rape is real. Polygamy is real. Incest is real. Bestiality is real. Pedophilia is real. Should any of these be included too just because they are realities in our world?
Look, people can make any kind of game they want, and people can choose to play it or not to play it. My point is not to censor what kind of games are being made. My point is that a tiny number of people are having a disproportionate influence in all levels of society — and much of that influence is being felt at the level of political correctness.
Jason
LikeLike
January 17, 2013 at 4:07 pm
First of all, the things you compare homosexuality to reveals your biases. Not that you were hiding them.
When I read or watch anything, scifi included, I look for realistic characters and relatable situations. Whether that’s in a realistic setting or not is besides the point.
Games like these include romance subplots. Games like these are played by both straight and gay gamers. Why shouldn’t a gay gamer be allowed to play a gay character, given that romances are already part of the game?
I don’t see how making gay characters an option is disproportionate at all. Unless you live under a rock and never encounter gay people at all.
LikeLike
January 18, 2013 at 9:37 am
NotAScientist,
And your reply reveals your biases. Who is free from biases? Please reveal that person. And why can’t the rest of the readers of this blog be free from your prejudiced points of view? 😉
We don’t live under a rock, I live on the same rock you live on. On this rock, there are polygamists and child-lovers. Why can’t they play a game where they can play a polygamist or a child lover? It is an underserved market and someone should try it. Thieves, murderers, bullies, and gangsters already have their games (GTA, Mafia, etc.), sexual predators and addicts should be free to play their fantasies out too. I am not equating the latter with homosexuals. It’s just that once companies begin serving certain markets in the name of pure freedom and profit, then there really is no market that shouldn’t be served. Why should your sense of disgust and revulsion have anything to do with a company that wants to serve predators who do not share your sense of disgust, so long as they keep it all in the virtual world? Above all, guaranteed, they would be very realistic characters pure of hypocrisy, if that’s what you are after.
No one here is arguing that a company is not free to create such a product, I believe Jason is pointing out (whether from a good or bad source) an example of the ridiculousness of the zeitgeist of the times.
I can’t speak for Jason, but can only assume, that similar to myself, we are contrarians opposed to that zeitgeist and see in these “moral revolutions” a wave of destruction that is going to hurt a whole lot of people and damage a whole lot of lives all while society is celebrating that damage. You may believe that going along with the zeitgeist, the “times” is the wisest course of action. I would disagree. Chronological forward motion, the passing of days, months, and years combined with changing public opinion and sentiment does not equal progress in morality or a better society.
Going along with the zeitgeist is not moral steadfastness nor personal righteousness. It just means you share the biases of the current mood. It doesn’t mean you are unbiased, it just reveals you’ll go along for the sake of it. I’m a very happy contrarian. I don’t think this zeitgeist is gonna be good for things. I wish we could have this conversation again in fifty years. I wouldn’t have to say anything.
Stan,
Fussy over tags? Really? It’s a free world man. If BioWare is free to make gay planets (virtual I know), where human sexuality is turned on its head, then Jason is free to tag his blog posts however the heck he wants.
Jason,
Sorry for being so feisty today.
Grace & Peace,
Chad
LikeLike
January 18, 2013 at 9:59 am
“Why can’t they play a game where they can play a polygamist or a child lover?”
Because, in general, when you play a video game you’re playing the hero.
Being a child abuser causes harm. And thus, it would not make sense for the hero character you play to be a pedophile.
Homosexuality does not cause harm in and of itself. So there’s no reason a hero can’t be gay.
I also don’t see any good reason why there couldn’t be polygamous characters in a video game. Particularly a sci-fi video game that includes aliens that might embrace polygamy more, on average, than our culture does.
“then there really is no market that shouldn’t be served. ”
They can certainly try, if they want to.
” You may believe that going along with the zeitgeist, the “times” is the wisest course of action.”
I don’t care about the zeitgeist. I look at what may or may not cause harm.
Many things you worry about, like homosexuality, don’t cause it.
LikeLike
January 18, 2013 at 10:15 am
Chad, I’m not sure what gave you the impression that I didn’t think Jason should be “free” to practice bad judgment (i.e., using a nonsensical post tag system, using an array of 4 yellow journals as his sources and parroting their added fictions, etc.). I am similarly “free” to call out that bad judgment.
LikeLike
January 19, 2013 at 11:41 am
NotAScientist,
“I look at what may or may not cause harm. Many things you worry about, like homosexuality, don’t cause it.”
Well, that’s where we disagree. First, I don’t worry about it, rather, I’m opposed to it. And secondly, homosexuality does a great deal of harm. Homosexuality has no future, quite literally. It turns sexual relations on its head and destroys the chance of a next generation.
Folks in agreement with the homosexual cause have a way of turning the discussion rhetorically (like saying “what YOU worry” about) without addressing fundamental facts and making real arguments based on history and reason. This is not about my personal hangups, this is about plain scientific, biological, social, historical, and legal facts and reasoning. We happy contrarians to this mood believe that great damage is caused to human lives and society by homosexual behavior and that such behavior is morally reprehensible and biologically abnormal. There is simply no biological, familial, or social basis for homosexual races, absolutely no legal basis for marriage of any kind than that of male-female unions, and a great amount of historical precedent indicating that an upward trend of homosexuality is sign of societal decadence and decay.
It may take a generation or two to reveal the extent of this harm, but it’s as certain to come as the outworking of all other laws of nature.
One can already see the harm caused by this in looking at media celebration of homosexuals exiting the closet. If you are a heterosexual male who leaves his wife for a young blonde, you are excoriated as a beast of a man; if you are a homosexual male who leaves his wife and 4 kids, you are cause celebre! The media applauds while a family is destroyed.
Furthermore, one can see the harm to our whole system of governing and community relationships. The issue of tolerance is being turned on its head. The recent case of Louie Giglio’s withdrawal from praying at the inauguration demonstrates this reverse intolerance at the highest levels of our nation! This is something that is going to play itself out across our whole nation in the next decade and it likely will not be pretty.
The question is: what kind of citizens are we all going to be? You appear firmly in favor or laizzez-faire to the homosexual cause, ready to defend their rights. I too am ready, prepared, and willing to protect homosexuals to every right given by the Constitution, the same ones I have. The question is this: are homosexuals and homosexual advocates prepared to do everything they can to protect the conscience and rights of their opponents and preserve absolute freedom of speech, the press, and freedom of conscience? The truth is, that the answer on the latter appears to be no. This is clearly seen by the President’s HHS mandate and now the Giglio imbroglio.
As far as worry, when we happy contrarians look at these recent events, it doth appear that we indeed have something to worry about. And you do to, should you ever find yourself on the opposite end of the zeitgeist.
LikeLike
January 19, 2013 at 11:49 am
Stan,
Touche. You are indeed free to do so. Just seems kinda petty and peevish. Worldview issues are often tagged under apologetics or addressed by apologists for the Faith. Jason ain’t runnin’ no professional journal here, he does this for fun and personal ministry.
I hope you have a good day. Ciao.
LikeLike
January 19, 2013 at 1:43 pm
“The question is this: are homosexuals and homosexual advocates prepared to do everything they can to protect the conscience and rights of their opponents and preserve absolute freedom of speech, the press, and freedom of conscience?”
Yes. At least, I am.
However, you having freedom of speech doesn’t get rid of mine. So you’re free to think or say whatever you like. But I’m free to say you’re wrong in return.
LikeLike