Character Sexuality?

[GrayGriffin]

Given the language chosen by the player, it was a generic proactive defense of potential trans- people, not a personal thing other than that person's personal intolerance of a disapproved view.

You do realize it's a good thing to defend trans people even if there aren't any there physically, right? That's what makes you an actual ally instead of just standing up for them when they can see in order to get "brownie points" or something.

[Floret]

You do realize it's a good thing to defend trans people even if there aren't any there physically, right? That's what makes you an actual ally instead of just standing up for them when they can see in order to get "brownie points" or something.

1. This is an incredibly important thing to realise and do. To be an ally means to stick up to bull**** when you notice it (And are safe to stick up to it), because it is bull****, not for any other reason. Sure, arguing with racist grandma might be a lost cause, so sometimes you might just have to groan and move on. But the problem with social prejudices is that they are just seeped into our thinking, nothing conscious most of the time, and therefor, speaking out against them when you notice them might point out how deep those go. And pointing out that some thinking you had not previously connected to an issue of prejudice is indeed connected can help, and help rid oneself of that prejudice.

2. However. Playing *******s in an RPG is a thing, even if you yourself aren't one. And I think playing *******s should be a thing, otherwise we lock ourselves out of an incredible amount of roleplaying opportunity. Prejudice can be an interesting thing to explore, and playing characters with weaknesses and stupid beliefs can be fun. I know all of my characters have some form of belief that I'd at least look at them sceptically for, and I honestly wouldn't wanna play a character that shares all of my views.
Obviously this needs to be clear with the other players, and everyone at the table (or otherwise in the game) has to be able to know (And possibly to be able to know and not think "probably...?") that these comments are not from the player, but from the character. And, as with prejudiced characters in other fiction, it serves well to contrast the prejudice with the fact of the prejudiced character not actually being in the right, or maybe even a hypocrite. For this it helps to have these things cleared with the group beforehand (Dark Eye for example has "Prejudiced" as a character flaw that exists - pretty easy to know when you are dealing with it, being written directly on the sheet.)
It can backfire, and a comment being taken in earnest, that happens. The thing to do is to discuss it, apologize, clear up the situation, and possibly refrain from expressing these character traits in the presence of any player still uncomfortable.

So... I can sort of understand what Segev was going for. What I cannot understand is how it isn't immediately obvious what the problem with the statement is. Seriously, that one is incredibly on the nose, and one of the most basic and common transmysogynistic statements in the book.

Also, it's important to remember that everyone has different limits, and people with multiple facets of identity that people might be prejudiced against might have different limits regarding each one of those facets. I know I have.

[Koo Rehtorb]

There's nothing inherently wrong with playing a character who says offensive things.

However, when those offensive things touch on current sensitive real world issues then it becomes incumbent on you to make sure that everyone is fine OOC with it first. If people are going to get upset then it's your responsibility to avoid it. Generally speaking, I think it's best to avoid doing it until you know everyone in the group you're playing with fairly well and know how they'll react to it.

[Segev]

To the OP: On topic, I'm glad your game went well, and that it was met with only the level of reaction it deserved. That is, it's something to RP off of, but not something to obsess over. Positively or negatively.

Deleted the rest of the post to replace it with this, which I think is more constructive than trying to expressly address the other arguments:

I don't want to care about your sexuality. I don't want to HAVE to care. If I am asked to care, and I think it unhealthy, I will be saddened. Fortunately or unfortunately for you, I am not in charge of your life, and my thoughts - right or wrong - about how healthy your choices, preferences, or urges (regardless of how much control you have over them) might be is irrelevant to whether you are healthy and happy. I wish you all happiness. I don't hate you. I may not want to discuss certain topics with you, but that should be MY choice. I doubt you want to discuss certain other topics with me; that should be your choice.

We should all advocate for people to have power over their own lives, to determine for themselves what makes them happy and healthy.

This includes people's right to think sex with people with certain equipment is gross.

[rferries]

Tangential, but am I the only person who's bugged by how Haley does this? A bit because her bi experimenting is safely in her past, where she never so much acknowledges the attractiveness of anyone other than her hetero partner. A bit because Elan never tried saving princes to see how it went, Belkar never made a pretty boy swoon when there were no handy females around, and really I can't remember the last named LGBT+ male character in the strip. Bisexuality as a way to make a female seem more adventurous in a way that will never interfere with an existing hetero relationship is a rather annoying trope.

Yeah, it's something of a cliche but a fairly harmless one (especially given the wonders the Giant has done with V & trans/non-binary representation). I'd like more male representation myself but them's the breaks.

I'm sorry, but my sexuality is neither a choice, nor anyway comparable to alcohol consumption. This "I don't hate you I just think what you're doing is wrong" is a garbage ideology and I have no problem calling people who hold it the homophobes that they are.

A good rule of thumb!

There's nothing inherently wrong with playing a character who says offensive things.

However, when those offensive things touch on current sensitive real world issues then it becomes incumbent on you to make sure that everyone is fine OOC with it first. If people are going to get upset then it's your responsibility to avoid it. Generally speaking, I think it's best to avoid doing it until you know everyone in the group you're playing with fairly well and know how they'll react to it.

Also sage advice, for any social situation really. :)

[Boci]

The irony here is thick enough to run across. My issue is that I'm not allowed to HAVE an opinion that isn't the approved one. Whatever the approved one is today, with this person who's judging. I'm the one not allowed to object, no matter what happens, because I'm the one guilty of badthought.

Um, yes?

"Black people are equal to white people and deserve the same respectful treatment white people receive at this table"

You cannot really have a "second opinion" there. If you genuinely disagree with the statement, you cannot help that, but in most social circles you are obliged to keep that to yourself, and others do not owe you respect and understanding for voicing your second opinion. And the same applies to:

"Members of the LBGT are equal to straight people and deserve the same respectful treatment white people receive at this table"

[Dr.Samurai]

I'm sorry, but my sexuality is neither a choice, nor anyway comparable to alcohol consumption.

It's an analogy. Maybe a bad one. The greater point is that you can not agree with or approve of everything about a person, and still respect them, accept them, socialize with them, etc. The jump from "doesn't agree with homosexuality" to "this person doesn't accept me as a human and hates me" is astronomical in scale.

This "I don't hate you I just think what you're doing is wrong" is a garbage ideology and I have no problem calling people who hold it the homophobes that they are.

Because you equate "doesn't agree" with "hate" and "phobia". If you have no problem doing that, of course you have no problem calling everyone that disagrees with you a homophone.

I don't care if I'm making these people feel unwelcome and uncomfortable,

Well, the OP does, that's why the thread exists. Segev was asking in turn how the OP would feel if the players didn't react positively. I think that's a good question to ask, because hurt feelings could be felt all around. It's something to consider, because the OP may be worried about making other people uncomfortable, and unknowingly walk into an uncomfortable situation for herself.

because I won't shut up and pretend to be straight for their backwards sensabilities

No one asked you to. The pretending is in the roleplaying. In my experience, sexuality is not something that's ever really explored at the table, or expected to be a thing at the table. So it makes sense to be apprehensive about making it an aspect of your character that comes up often enough to worry about making things awkward.

That would certainly "cause any awkwardness", to quote the OP, right? If you portray the sexuality, someone expresses discomfort, and it ends up hurting *your* feelings and making *you* feel weird.

[Segev]

Um, yes?

"Black people are equal to white people and deserve the same respectful treatment white people receive at this table"

You cannot really have a "second opinion" there. If you genuinely disagree with the statement, you cannot help that, but in most social circles you are obliged to keep that to yourself, and others do not owe you respect and understanding for voicing your second opinion. And the same applies to:

"Members of the LBGT are equal to straight people and deserve the same respectful treatment white people receive at this table"

And the straw men come out.

Nobody suggested that equality of treatment wasn't valid. The trouble comes when "equality" starts becoming cover for "special treatment."

In another thread on this board, I was just in a lengthy debate with people who felt that my idea of treating black and white people with the same respect was inherently racist, because I didn't want to have to know what color somebody's skin was before I determined how to treat them. Color-blindness, see, is apparently racist, because some races need to be given special privileges or given different standards to meet in order to treat them equally to others.

There was no "inequality" towards trans- people in what happened, other than in the minds of those who wish to interpret it as hateful towards such people.

Unless you're going to say that nobody has a right to prefer particular "equipment" and be grossed out when they are presented a bait-and-switch. (Admittedly, not intentional on any PCs' part in this case, but the point remains.)

[Anymage]

To the OP: On topic, I'm glad your game went well, and that it was met with only the level of reaction it deserved. That is, it's something to RP off of, but not something to obsess over. Positively or negatively.

I thought about adding a similar idea in my comment to the OP, but realized that it would be counterproductive. An immature player and/or one who's a self-centered narcissist can make any even marginally sensitive topic uncomfortable. However, someone who's asking a question like this in the first place is probably going to err on the side of being more conscientious than less, and telling them to avoid immature/narcissistic behavior will most likely result in them overcorrecting.

Not touching on the broader topic here. But sometimes telling someone "don't be a jerk" is counterproductive in situations where a jerk wouldn't be asking for advice in the first place.

[Segev]

Dr. Samurai, thank you for your explanation of where I'm coming from.

However, this typo makes me laugh:

calling everyone that disagrees with you a homophone.

I desperately wish I could come up with a good pun involving homophones (as most do) that is pertinent to this topic, but sadly, my usually pun-filled brain is failing me on this issue!




Otherwise, what he said is pretty on the nose for what I was getting at. I can disagree with your preferences and not hate you. I can't stand Mexican food (there's a spice or something in it that is just hideous to my taste buds), but that doesn't mean that those who love it have to hate me for my preference. I like gaming; this doesn't mean people who think gaming is a habit that will tempt me to satan worship have to hate ME, though if they care about me they might (annoyingly) try to talk me out of indulging my preference for D&D.

I can disapprove of people's actions, beliefs, preferences, and choices without hating them. I try not to preach at them, either, as I know that's annoying. But if I'm asked for my opinion, I will give it. All I ask is for similar courtesy.

Trying to hunt for coded signs of hatred from me is irksome, because I assure you: if I hate you, I will let you know to your face. I won't pretend otherwise. I am not one for obfuscation (except, possibly, as a rhetorical tactic in a debate where emotions are highly charged and I'm trying to distance emotions from the logical process). This is sometimes frustrating in gaming, because I don't RP deceit very well, which means I have to rely heavily on roll-play to get anything like a bluff across.

[Boci]

And the straw men come out.

Nobody suggested that equality of treatment wasn't valid. The trouble comes when "equality" starts becoming cover for "special treatment."

More often, the trouble is when people confuse a minorities equality for special treatment. People don't bat an eye when the male barbarians flirts with tavern wench, but do a double take when the male bard flirts with a male guard.

Saying "accept me" isn't asking for special treatment, it just seems like special treatment when a member of the LGBT asks for it because that draws attention to the whole thing, where as straight people never have to ask, they get it automatically, which means the process isn't noticed.

[Segev]

But sometimes telling someone "don't be a jerk" is counterproductive in situations where a jerk wouldn't be asking for advice in the first place.

This...is actually a very good insight. I think I understood it on some level, but I'm not sure I'd seen it put in words before. I will have to consider it a bit and try to incorporate it in my future decision-making, because...it's very true.

[Dr.Samurai]

I desperately wish I could come up with a good pun involving homophones (as most do) that is pertinent to this topic, but sadly, my usually pun-filled brain is failing me on this issue!

LMAO, sorry for the typo lol!

Everyone, stop calling people homophones!!!

[Segev]

More often, the trouble is when people confuse a minorities equality for special treatment. People don't bat an eye when the male barbarians flirts with tavern wench, but do a double take when the male bard flirts with a male guard.

Saying "accept me" isn't asking for special treatment, it just seems like special treatment when a member of the LGBT asks for it because that draws attention to the whole thing, where as straight people never have to ask, they get it automatically, which means the process isn't noticed.

When the guard refuses the male bard because he's straight, that's seen as "oppression." When the female bar wench refuses the male barbarian because she's a lesbian, that's seen as "woman power."

Unless it isn't, and it's just because people have preferences. "Not into that" happens. The successful cassanovas and femmes fatale tend to not just be good at seduction, but also at finding seducible targets.

And I can accept you without approving of your actions or preferences. You are not your libido. (If you are, that is a personal problem that I would rather stay far, far away from.)

[Honest Tiefling]

Everyone, stop calling people homophones!!!

Your not my real dad, you can't tell me what to do!

When the guard refuses the male bard because he's straight, that's seen as "oppression." When the female bar wench refuses the male barbarian because she's a lesbian, that's seen as "woman power."

Yeah, and it's really awkward when you want to introduce certain elements, but can't because you might be accused of doing so for fan service reasons, especially if you happen to be male. This is why a lot of people who mention off hand a spouse/lover of the same gender tend to be elderly people in my games when interacting with strangers. I wonder if anyone thinks I have a fetish for grandmotherly lesbians at this point?

[Boci]

When the guard refuses the male bard because he's straight, that's seen as "oppression." When the female bar wench refuses the male barbarian because she's a lesbian, that's seen as "woman power."

No it isn't, you're just making that up. Sure, humans some humans are unreasonable, SOME no doubt would, but most aren't. It will start to look like oppression when ALL the NPCs the guard hits on turn them down for being straight, and that's when the the inequality rears its ugly head.

And I can accept you without approving of your actions or preferences. You are not your libido. (If you are, that is a personal problem that I would rather stay far, far away from.)

Why is this even a thing? Have you ever been told by a gay person "I don't approve of your actions or preferences when it comes to sex, but I can accept you"? Of course you haven't. Why do you feel so strongly about your right to do the reverse?

[icefractal]

I don't want to care about your sexuality. I don't want to HAVE to care.

So I guess you wouldn't want to see gross oversharing like:
"I flirt with the tavern wench" (or vice versa)
"The prince's betrothed has been kidnapped by fey and replaced with an imposter."
"Before we leave town, I need to send a letter to my wife."
Anything with a succubus, nymph, etc.
Romeo and Juliet


Oh, and to make my point from earlier a bit more precise:
"Look, what you do in your own basement is up to you, even if I disapprove of it, but wearing a t-shirt with a d20 on it? Stop rubbing your unhealthy lifestyle in my face!"

[Jormengand]

There was no "inequality" towards trans- people in what happened, other than in the minds of those who wish to interpret it as hateful towards such people.

No, I think that treating trans people like freaks is unequal no matter how you swing it. You can't act like a particular class of people are disgusting and awful and then be surprised when they're offended. I mean you can, but you look exceptionally foolish when you do.

EDIT: I also find it hilarious how much time you - who want us to know that you don't want to have to deal with people's sexualities - are devoting to talking about people's sexualities and the minutae of exactly what you think is wrong with them.

[Penelomeeg]

It's an analogy. Maybe a bad one. The greater point is that you can not agree with or approve of everything about a person, and still respect them, accept them, socialize with them, etc. The jump from "doesn't agree with homosexuality" to "this person doesn't accept me as a human and hates me" is astronomical in scale.

Because you equate "doesn't agree" with "hate" and "phobia". If you have no problem doing that, of course you have no problem calling everyone that disagrees with you a homophone.

Well, the OP does, that's why the thread exists. Segev was asking in turn how the OP would feel if the players didn't react positively. I think that's a good question to ask, because hurt feelings could be felt all around. It's something to consider, because the OP may be worried about making other people uncomfortable, and unknowingly walk into an uncomfortable situation for herself.

No one asked you to. The pretending is in the roleplaying. In my experience, sexuality is not something that's ever really explored at the table, or expected to be a thing at the table. So it makes sense to be apprehensive about making it an aspect of your character that comes up often enough to worry about making things awkward.

That would certainly "cause any awkwardness", to quote the OP, right? If you portray the sexuality, someone expresses discomfort, and it ends up hurting *your* feelings and making *you* feel weird.

Gonna stop you right there. I do not care if I make people uncomfortable with my sexuality or about accomidating people who dislike or disagree with it. Honestly? Screw those people with a rusty fork.

I wanted a delicate way to approach to topic of sexuality so I wouldn't be accused of shoehorning it in. If anyone feels uncomfortable with a gay character in general? I leave the group.

[Penelomeeg]

When the guard refuses the male bard because he's straight, that's seen as "oppression." When the female bar wench refuses the male barbarian because she's a lesbian, that's seen as "woman power."

Unless it isn't, and it's just because people have preferences. "Not into that" happens. The successful cassanovas and femmes fatale tend to not just be good at seduction, but also at finding seducible targets.

And I can accept you without approving of your actions or preferences. You are not your libido. (If you are, that is a personal problem that I would rather stay far, far away from.)

I have literally never seen that happen. My games I run as a DM have people pf all sexualities and hell there was even a character someone wanted to romance but then discovered they were asexual. They stayed friends and he became a story important NPC.

I have seen players rage out when they can't seduce the bar wench in some highschool games. But those were immature teens.

[Floret]

No one asked you to. The pretending is in the roleplaying. In my experience, sexuality is not something that's ever really explored at the table, or expected to be a thing at the table. So it makes sense to be apprehensive about making it an aspect of your character that comes up often enough to worry about making things awkward.

I think this varies too widely from table to table to make such sweeping statements about it. It certainly comes up regularly in my groups. (At least in the sense of characters flirting and having relationships).
And, sexuality coming up might just be as wholly innocent and natural as talking about weekend plans with a significant other.

We should all advocate for people to have power over their own lives, to determine for themselves what makes them happy and healthy.

This includes people's right to think sex with people with certain equipment is gross.

Sex with them? Possibly. The fact they have it? No. Two different things, the statement of your character was the latter.
I mean, alright, of course, there should be the right to think it, freedom of thought and all. But not the right to say it without justified repercussion.

When the guard refuses the male bard because he's straight, that's seen as "oppression." When the female bar wench refuses the male barbarian because she's a lesbian, that's seen as "woman power."

Unless it isn't, and it's just because people have preferences. "Not into that" happens. The successful cassanovas and femmes fatale tend to not just be good at seduction, but also at finding seducible targets.

And I can accept you without approving of your actions or preferences. You are not your libido. (If you are, that is a personal problem that I would rather stay far, far away from.)

Alright, now we ventured far into strawman territory. Being rejected by someone because of their sexuality is not oppression, and I have never seen anyone honestly claim that. Now, if, in a setting that is ostensibly equal sexuality-wise, same-gender flirtation never works, but other-gender flirtation has a reasonable success rate (Over a few dozen instances at least), I might understand someone crying foul play - for the trend, not for the specific instance.

And, just to be clear, where is your line? In my gaming groups it is rather usual to have OOC chats beforehand (As we are all something close to friends at least). I'd have thought that to be a usual thing? It certainly also was in all groups I have heard of or witnessed enough. To maybe give some hypotheticals: If, in that situation, I mentioned plans for the next day with my girlfriend, on which side would that fall, and would it fall on another side if I talked about my boyfriend instead? If I am freshly in love, and talk about my new girlfriend, while you knew another player in the round was my boyfriend, and he seemed not to mind that fact, on which side of the line would that fall?
None of this is actually sexual (Just, talking about relationships). But all of it are things that I know people who say "no, I accept you, but" somehow treat as such. As more taboo than the alternatives. I will not stop being the way I am - and I don't wanna hide it, and just share important parts of my life with friends. People who make the same statements as you misconstrue this as something else - can you at least understand why such a statement might make us wary, if the above things have been shouted down as "shoving sexuality in someones face"?

[rferries]

No it isn't, you're just making that up. Sure, humans some humans are unreasonable, SOME no doubt would, but most aren't. It will start to look like oppression when ALL the NPCs the guard hits on turn them down for being straight, and that's when the the inequality rears its ugly head.

I feel like Sense Motive could be used to check if it's worth hitting on someone or not :D

[Honest Tiefling]

Alright, now we ventured far into strawman territory. Being rejected by someone because of their sexuality is not oppression, and I have never seen anyone honestly claim that...

REALLY!??!!?! I've seen it in real life! Do...Do you just not know what a neckbeard is? Have you never encountered one of these magnificent creatures in the wild?

[Penelomeeg]

Dr. Samurai, thank you for your explanation of where I'm coming from.

However, this typo makes me laugh:



I desperately wish I could come up with a good pun involving homophones (as most do) that is pertinent to this topic, but sadly, my usually pun-filled brain is failing me on this issue!




Otherwise, what he said is pretty on the nose for what I was getting at. I can disagree with your preferences and not hate you. I can't stand Mexican food (there's a spice or something in it that is just hideous to my taste buds), but that doesn't mean that those who love it have to hate me for my preference. I like gaming; this doesn't mean people who think gaming is a habit that will tempt me to satan worship have to hate ME, though if they care about me they might (annoyingly) try to talk me out of indulging my preference for D&D.

I can disapprove of people's actions, beliefs, preferences, and choices without hating them. I try not to preach at them, either, as I know that's annoying. But if I'm asked for my opinion, I will give it. All I ask is for similar courtesy.

Trying to hunt for coded signs of hatred from me is irksome, because I assure you: if I hate you, I will let you know to your face. I won't pretend otherwise. I am not one for obfuscation (except, possibly, as a rhetorical tactic in a debate where emotions are highly charged and I'm trying to distance emotions from the logical process). This is sometimes frustrating in gaming, because I don't RP deceit very well, which means I have to rely heavily on roll-play to get anything like a bluff across.

Also I'm not saying this out of any anger or negativity towards you, because I honestly don't bother being any at people for these sorts of things because its not worth it, but you are expressing homophobic viewpoints.

Homophobia isn't just picketing pride events and shouting "ew gays!" Every chance you get. There's varying degrees just like racist ideaology. It's also in those involuntary reactions like scrunching your nose at a gay couple, or saying you "disagree with it".

I think the reason you don't comprehend the reaction to what you consider a middle ground is really it's only people who think that way that consider it a middle ground. To a gay person that's indefinitely negative ground. Because hearing "I disapprove but whatever" isnt as bad as "gays burn in hell" but its still hurtful and disheartening. Because would you say that to a straight man to his face about ths woman he had married and chosen to spend ths rest of his life with and had a happy healthy relationship? Most people would say no because it'd be considered rude and you're infringing on a happy situation you don't need to. That's how "I dissapprove" feels to us.

We dont want people to celebrate or congradulate us for being gay. We want to be accepted and treated equally. We want to when people look at us to not register us as any different than a straight person or have any differing opinions on our sexuality/gender than they would a straight/cis person.

We dont have parades to shove it in your face or force people to celebrate us. We do it so we can have one day where we're surrounded by people who understand and accept us and we can be proud that we put up with varying degrees of bull**** and still manage to be here another day going through life like everbody else.

Just ask yourself this: if there was an integral part of yourself that you couldn't change but you knew you would be judged for most of your life and could even lead to you having a more difficult life than most people...wouldn't it frustrate you? Make you a little more wary and snappish towards people whp remind you of that disadvantahe even slightly? How would it feel to you?

[Max_Killjoy]

Why is this even a thing? Have you ever been told by a gay person "I don't approve of your actions or preferences when it comes to sex, but I can accept you"? Of course you haven't. Why do you feel so strongly about your right to do the reverse?

I seem to recall some of the homosexual activists at the university I attended referring to all heterosexuals as "breeders" and "meat cattle"... and to bisexuals as "confused and playing straight"... but still "accepting" them.

[Boci]

I seem to recall some of the homosexual activists at the university I attended referring to all heterosexuals as "breeders" and "meat cattle"... and to bisexuals as "confused and playing straight"... but still "accepting" them.

And that was intolerant of them. By Segev's logic though that's fine, because they accepted them.

[Penelomeeg]

I seem to recall some of the homosexual activists at the university I attended referring to all heterosexuals as "breeders" and "meat cattle"... and to bisexuals as "confused and playing straight"... but still "accepting" them.

This is actually an issue in the homosexual community. There's those "vocal minorities" that a lot of people want to see quiet down more because they make the community worse while swearing their improving it.

[icefractal]

I seem to recall some of the homosexual activists at the university I attended referring to all heterosexuals as "breeders" and "meat cattle"... and to bisexuals as "confused and playing straight"... but still "accepting" them.

Yeah, and those people are jerks. I wouldn't invite them to an RPG group either.

[2D8HP]

I wonder if anyone thinks I have a fetish for grandmotherly lesbians at this point?

[JOKE]


You mean some people don't?

[/JOKE]

Gonna stop you right there. I do not care if I make people uncomfortable with....
....If anyone feels uncomfortable with a gay character in general? I leave the group.

Sounds like a wise policy.

I don't remember anyone voicing anti-gay (or anti-anything) opinions at a gaming table (but that may be because most of my table memories are dim), but I've found that my co-workers who are outspoken about being "anti" (whether because of who someone loves, what there skin shade is, where they go on a weekend morning, etc.), are never just that. "He's a bigot against [whatever] but otherwise he's cool" just doesn't really happen in my experience. I have worked with some guys who were nice to me but mean to someone else (for no reason I could discern) who did not our share skin shade making me suspect that disperate treatment was happening, that is not what I'm talking about, what I mean is that in my experience anyone who flat out says "I don't like those [whatever]", is always an annoying jerk to me in some other way as well, even when I'm not in the group they say they dislike (maybe you have to voice similar hate for them to not be a jerk to you, I haven't tested that).

Whenever I've had to work with vocal bigots, they have always found a way to annoy me besides their bigotry, every single time (admittedly my sample is only with building trades guys).

[LibraryOgre]

The Mod Wonder: Oh, look, we've wandered into politics. Since the original issue has been resolved, we'll just lock this and I'll start handing out the warnings, hmm?